N2 - Slane Bypass [planning decision pending]

Slane Resident · 01-12-2010 2:17pm

Either that or he's moved on to a more gullible audience.

Here's a link to a video which is linked on the Save Newgrange website, one of only 10 links on the whole site, so it would be reasonable to conclude it's rated fairly highly.

Ooops, just went in to link it and it's "been removed by user".

It was by the Indefatigible Wombat (?) and it was very interesting. It was an appeal by IW against the destruction of Newgrange. Apparently the road that goes around Newgrange was a bit dangerous, there've been "some deaths, but not too many" and so they decided to put a road through it instead. The bigwigs were trying to push through a law to enable them to put this road through and thereby destroy this site (which from the video, it sounded like he'd never heard of before). Linked on SN since February, as far as I recall. Suddenly removed as soon as it was spotted and linked onto Save Newgrange The Facts as an example of the rubbish that's being spouted out there.

Chris_5339762 · 01-12-2010 8:02pm

How similar is the fight about Slane going to be compared to the fight over the A303 at Stonehenge in the UK? Where the whole thing just gets more and more expensive and bitter before getting completely scrapped?

Slane Resident · 05-12-2010 4:45pm

Well hopefully not, because this is about a much-needed bypass to save lives rather than aesthetic issues.

Chris_5339762 · 05-12-2010 5:31pm

Aesthetic issues? The A303 at Stonehenge is just about the worst bottleneck in the UK. It needs solving way more than Slane does to take the traffic away from the stones. A load of hippies and environmentalists fought the project into the ground and it got scrapped. Slane needs to be bypassed though before the hippies get on board (they'll be looking for something to do now that the M3 is built).

But it needs an S2 bypass, not a 2+2. Eventually the N2 needs to be detrunked and possibly a spur from the M1 used as a replacement route.

Slane Resident · 07-12-2010 2:26am

Sorry, I don't know a lot about Stonehenge but my understanding was that the existing road was viewed as too close to the monument and detracted from the ambience.

Slane has nothing to do with being a bottleneck, it isn't in fact a bottleneck and there are rarely hold-ups going through Slane. The issue is one of safety and saving lives.

I would agree with you though that once the crusties get involved, there's no way of knowing how long things will get held up.

spacetweek · 08-12-2010 6:29pm

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Aesthetic issues? The A303 at Stonehenge is just about the worst bottleneck in the UK. It needs solving way more than Slane does to take the traffic away from the stones. A load of hippies and environmentalists fought the project into the ground and it got scrapped. Slane needs to be bypassed though before the hippies get on board (they'll be looking for something to do now that the M3 is built).

But it needs an S2 bypass, not a 2+2. Eventually the N2 needs to be detrunked and possibly a spur from the M1 used as a replacement route.

Visited Stonehenge earlier this year. Bypass very badly needed. The protesters totally shot themselves in the foot by protesting against the new A303. Whole time we were walking around the stones, you could hear engines idling in the traffic jam on the existing A303 nearby. Disgraceful hippies.

Your comment about the M3 is salient. I've noticed a breed of what I call "crustie tourists" - protesters that move from protest to protest around the country. It's gone now but here used be a site called rage.co.uk (Roads Action Group Envirnmentalism something) and the thing was like a brochure. Lists of protests, local accommodation, contact phone numbers, background to the scheme. Awful, awful stuff. In Ireland in the last 10 years we had N11 Glen of the Downs, then Carrickmines M50, then Tara M3, and now Slane N2.

I also agree about the detrunking. This madness about making the whole N2 a dual has got to stop. The M50-Ashbourne motorway was way OTT, though I'm glad to note that the Ashbourne-Ardee dual is now gone from the NRA's site. If they dualled the whole thing, trying to get traffic to use a spur from the M1 would never work.

Jayuu · 09-12-2010 9:23pm

To be honest I don't think detrunking the N2 is going to make any difference to its usage especially if Slane is bypassed.

I think most people will continue to use the N2 to avoid the M1 toll, especially hauliers who are trying to keep costs under control. I still don't see any reason why the NRA (or which department is responsible) can't have a look at introducing some sort of monthly toll usage plan for hauliers to allow them unlimited usage for a set fee.

I know some hauliers would still not be happy paying when they can avoid tolls but they might be persuaded especially if there was a "carrot and stick" approach to this problem. So the "carrot" is to introduce a set fee, the "stick" is then to reduce the speed limits on the detrunked roads and line them with mobile cameras to catch people breaking the lower limits.

I don't want to go off topic here but can I ask has the speed limit on the R639 (the old N8) been reduced the way it has been on the R147 (the old N3)?

L1011 · 09-12-2010 10:52pm

Jayuu wrote: »

I don't want to go off topic here but can I ask has the speed limit on the R639 (the old N8) been reduced the way it has been on the R147 (the old N3)?

I believe not. Through Laois most of it is still the N77; and Tipp and Cork county councils have no problem slapping 100km/h limits on R roads.

I think its 80km/h along the bits bypassed by the Fermoy BP (tolled) though.

etchyed · 10-12-2010 1:05am

Jayuu wrote: »

...has the speed limit on the R639 (the old N8) been reduced the way it has been on the R147 (the old N3)?

Completely off topic and maybe you know this already but the old N3 is a dreadful example to use in this context. It runs parallel to the one of the only roads in the country with a minimum toll revenue quota (along with the Shannon Tunnel) and is a WS2 upgraded only about 10 years ago. A 100km/h limit is perfectly acceptable on this road and its downgrading to 80km/h is a disgrace.

Jayuu · 12-12-2010 7:15pm

etchyed wrote: »

Completely off topic and maybe you know this already but the old N3 is a dreadful example to use in this context. It runs parallel to the one of the only roads in the country with a minimum toll revenue quota (along with the Shannon Tunnel) and is a WS2 upgraded only about 10 years ago. A 100km/h limit is perfectly acceptable on this road and its downgrading to 80km/h is a disgrace.

I think its actually a perfect example of what I was trying to prove, namely that simply detrunking a road and putting a lower speed limit on it does absolutely nothing to persuade people to use the alternative.

The R147 is still widely used by people in order to bypass the M3 tolls. I should know this as I spend a lot of time driving to Kells over the last couple of months and invariably would take it to avoid at least one of the tolls (generally the Dunshaughlin toll on my outbound journey and the Kells toll on my inbound journey). In some cases I would alternate on and off the M3 to avoid both tolls. I would also say that the vast amount of traffic on the R147 (including myself) tended to travel close to the old speed limit especially on the wider, straighter sections of the road.

Likewise the idea of lower the speed limit on the N2 in isolation is not going to suddenly make people use the M1/M33 corridor. In fact with Slane bypassed it makes the road even more attractive.

dowlingm · 17-01-2011 4:52pm

Apologies if this is posted elsewhere.

Slane Bridge to close for repairs

Part of one of the busiest roads in the country, the N2 through Slane, Co Meath, is to close this afternoon for emergency repairs.

Subsidence was discovered on the northern approach road to Slane Bridge and Meath County Council said it has no option but to close the entire section to allow for repairs.

Traffic will instead be diverted through Navan.

Several thousand vehicles pass through Slane every day. It is expected the closure will be in place for the rest of the week and possibly into the weekend.

Irish and Proud · 17-01-2011 9:42pm

More on this from the Bypass Slane Campaign...

http://www.bypassslane.com/MillHillClosure.html

...and more about a support wall gradually collapsing...

http://www.bypassslane.com/BridgeCollapse.html

...and finally, lobbying Fine Gael in relation to the bypass...

http://www.bypassslane.com/FineGaelMeeting.html

JupiterKid · 17-01-2011 9:59pm

Slane Bridge is over 300 years old. It should not be carrying ANY modern motor traffic and indeed Slane and its medieval era bridge should have been bypassed decades ago.

I hope the road at Slane is closed for weeks if not months. I hope they find serious structural defects with the bridge that make it unsafe ever to take motor traffic again.

Slane needs its new bypass and modern bridge as a matter of urgency.

Amtmann · 18-01-2011 2:04am

SUBSIDENCE ON one of the two approach roads to Slane bridge in Co Meath yesterday forced the county council to close a section of the main Dublin to Derry road just south of Slane and divert traffic away from the bridge.

This led to renewed calls from local residents for the Slane bypass to be progressed so daily traffic crossing the bridge, including many trucks, would be taken out of the village.

“The environmental impact statement (EIS) on the bypass said the road is unfit for purpose. Anybody in Slane could have told you that without carrying out a technical examination of it,” said Michele Power of the Bypass Slane Campaign yesterday. “This is 21st century traffic that is using an old road and an old bridge, and we are calling on An Bord Pleanála to expedite the bypass process and get traffic out of the village.”

Road maintenance works have been ongoing on the N2 since last week. It is believed while contractors were digging a trench on Mill Hill they came across evidence of subsidence.

Mill Hill is the steep hill on the northbound side of the river.

A spokeswoman for Meath County Council said for health and safety reasons the council could not carry out the emergency repairs using the “stop-go” traffic management system that had been in use for the last week.

She said the closure would continue for the rest of this week and possibly into the weekend.

The closure “will inconvenience 10,000 motorists a day and will again put hardship on the long suffering residents and business people of Slane village”, according to Slane-based councillor Wayne Harding.

He said that because of “the level of subsidence of the road, a complete road closure was needed to carry out the works safely”. The diversion that was in place until at least this weekend “will put huge volumes of traffic on to the N51 Navan road from Slane”.

Both the council and the National Roads Authority said the problem was unrelated to the partial collapse of a wall at Slane bridge earlier this month. That was due to the impact of the icy weather.

A spokesman for the NRA said: “The work on the bridge will be done as planned bridge maintenance works and will not require road closure.”

Meanwhile, the council said the diversions at Slane would see northbound traffic exiting the N2 at Balrath Cross (R153) and head towards Navan before taking the N51 to Slane.

Southbound traffic would exit the N2 at the centre of Slane village and head to Navan. From there it would take the R153 to Balrath Cross (N2).

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0118/1224287760408.html

tuathal · 18-01-2011 6:19pm

Happy New Year to all. As we look forward to the An Bord Pleanala hearings into the fairytale Slane Bypass, we in Save Newgrange have some exciting news for you all, to start out the year in a positive manner.

The Oireachtas Transport Committee has decided to hold hearings into the proposed new one billion euro Dublin to Derry road - which the Slane bypass forms a small part of. You can read a hyperlinked version of the article on the Save Newgrange site - which also has dozens of other helpful links to credible information, relevant to the proposed road. Remember, one of Ireland's leading transport economists, as well as some leading archaeologists, have condemned this project on both economic and environmental grounds. You won't find anyone of that calibre supporting the Slane bypass on the Slane Bypass web site. The only people there supporting it are Fianna Fail, desperate for a few votes, and their well-paid cronies, desperate for a few pork barrel contracts - compliments of the IMF.

Welcome for public hearings into plans for Dublin-Derry road

FRANK McDONALD, Environment Editor
The Irish Times – 14 January 2011

OPPONENTS OF plans for a new road between Dublin and Derry have welcomed a decision by the Oireachtas transport committee to hold public hearings next month. The proposed route would be Ireland’s longest new road, replacing much of the N2 in the Republic and the A5 in Northern Ireland. It would be part-financed by €500 million which the Government agreed to provide under the 2006 St Andrews Agreement.

The Oireachtas hearings were requested by Joe Costello TD, Labour’s transport spokesman, after he met a coalition of anti-motorway and pro-heritage groups from both sides of the Border in Leinster House this week. Mr Costello told the delegation that Labour would draft a new national development plan if it entered government and every current infrastructure project would be reviewed, “no matter what stage of planning it is at”.

While refusing to be drawn on the N2-A5 given divided views on it in his own party, Mr Costello said the €500 million commitment would be the single biggest drawdown on transport spending in the coming years. Public consultation is under way on three sections of the route – the Slane bypass, the Monaghan bypass and the A5 in the North – which are being opposed by Save Newgrange, Don’t Bypass the Bypass and the Alternative A5 Alliance respectively.

“No cost-benefit analysis has been performed on the proposed road and traffic numbers do not justify building a new road rather than upgrading the existing one,” said Lynne Smyth of the Alternative A5 Alliance. John Dunbar, the group’s chairman, said Sinn Féin and DUP Ministers, as well as those from the Ulster Unionist Party and the SDLP, along with Taoiseach Brian Cowen, “have been saying quite matter of factly that the A5 is a ‘done deal’ and that is that”. He said Mr Costello’s comments that any new administration in the Republic “would need to look again at taking a half a billion out of the Southern economy at a time of a national economic emergency puts paid to that notion”.

Save Newgrange spokesman Vincent Salafia said leading archaeologists had made submissions to An Bord Pleanála against the Slane bypass route, arguing that it would be too close to Brú na Bóinne. He said the obvious solution to traffic problems in Slane would be to ban trucks, as agreed by Meath County Council in 2009, which would force them to use the M1.

Noel Murphy of the Don’t Bypass the Bypass campaign said Economic and Social Research Institute transport economist Dr Edgar Morgenroth had characterised the proposal to build a motorway east of the new Monaghan bypass as “total overkill”.

N2 Subsidence

As for the partial subsidence and closure of the N2 at Slane, it has two direct causes:

1. Minister for Transport, Noel Dempsey, (the 'traitor') the NRA and Meath County Manager, Tom Dowling, refused to implement the HGV ban that was voted for, unanimously, by Meath County Council in 2009, which has allowed 1,400 HGVs a day to wear down the road, and endanger the lives of motorists and residents.

2. 85% of the primary roads are now substandard, because the NRA spent all of our money building motorways, like the M3, that didn't have the traffic numbers to support them, over the last ten years.

It is appalling to see so-called 'Slane Residents' on here clamouring for a bypass, opposing the very HGV ban the majority of real residents clamoured for for the last 20 years. Even if the Slane bypass does go ahead, it will be years before it is completed, and the fact that they are willing to sit back and let this health and safety hazard threaten the lives of residents and their children shows that there is another agenda entirely at play here. But that's nothing new with Fianna Fail.

The Irish Times article today has Michelle Power attempting to paraphrase the EIS, in support of the bypass. Here is an actual quote from the EIS:

“Toll avoidance is obviously a motivation for some traffic to divert from the M1 to the N2 via Slane, especially for trucks.”

Two billion euros of public money has already been spent bypassing Slane, with the M1 just to the east, and the M3 just to the west. Yet, the Minister, County Manager and the NRA are happy to sit back and let the toll-dodgers plough through Slane, and rob the taxpayer at the same time - just to artificially inflate traffic numbers for the EIS - and basically con An Bord Pleanala into approving a dual carriageway that is not needed.

Slane bypass proponent facing criminal charges for assault

Cllr. Nick Killian (right), with Taoiseach Brian Cowen and other Fianna Fail cronies in Slane, in May 2009 - just before the NRA decision to shelve the bypass was magically reversed.

Bring on the election!

SNIP [/MOD]

lucernarian · 18-01-2011 6:44pm

Firstly, I assume the above poster is not calling someone a criminal while a court of this country has yet to decide a verdict??

As for the bridge, the bridge is patently unfit for purpose for bloody pedestrians let alone trucks and as the bridge is of heritage value, a bypass is the only way to deal with it.

I live very near the Louth/Meath border in the area and I can think of no person who wants the proposed bypass to be quashed. Some people do want just a HGV ban but no one would oppose the construction of a safe and proper bridge near the village. There are quite a lot of people who rely on that route even if they do not live within the confines of the small village. They will be impacted by any such decisions and as such will have strong views on it too. Particularly the agricultural producers of the region, as the construction of motorways is of no relevance to those who depend on tractor and trailer to transport produce etc.

tuathal · 18-01-2011 7:01pm

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

Firstly, I assume the above poster is not calling someone a criminal while a court of this country has yet to decide a verdict??

I didn't call him a "criminal". I called him "scum", for the way he has behaved towards members of the public, on this and other occasions, and I will stand over that no matter what the outcome of the trial. I added a still above from the youtube video that used to be on the net, but was taken down.

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

As for the bridge, the bridge is patently unfit for purpose for bloody pedestrians let alone trucks and as the bridge is of heritage value, a bypass is the only way to deal with it.

So build a new bridge, by all means.

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

I live very near the Louth/Meath border in the area and I can think of no person who wants the proposed bypass to be quashed. Some people do want just a HGV ban but no one would oppose the construction of a safe and proper bridge near the village. There are quite a lot of people who rely on that route even if they do not live within the confines of the small village. They will be impacted by any such decisions and as such will have strong views on it too. Particularly the agricultural producers of the region, as the construction of motorways is of no relevance to those who depend on tractor and trailer to transport produce etc.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and I am sure many of theirs are valid. That's why we have a legal process - assuming the money is there to pay for the road - which it isn't. If the process goes ahead, all we want is that the process is followed correctly, as we are confident it can lead to only one conclusion. But today, we have the Slane Bypass campaign calling on An Bord Pleanala to speed up the process, for their self interest, and to the detriment of others interests - ie the people who are being asked to pay for this - or who have a valid interest in the economy, environment and heritage of Ireland.

Incidentally, the A5 end of the Dublin to Derry road is being vehemently opposed by farmers there - who say it is a sacrilege to have good farmland destroyed for the sake of a political road that is not needed.

See http://www.alternativea5alliance.com/

Slane Resident · 18-01-2011 7:51pm

I wonder, Tuathal, if I was against the bypass, would I be a "real" Slane resident then? I'm assuming at least that you're talking about me, since you've accused me elsewhere on this board of not being a real Slane resident. Are the only "real" Slane residents the ones that agree with you?

But of course you're right. The people who actually live in Slane are against the bypass. Of course. Those people who drive over that horrendously dangerous bridge, the people who risk their lives daily to get to work/school/shops, they don't want a bypass. Not at all. :rolleyes:

I note your complaint about the "paraphrasing" of the EIS. Perhaps a direct quote might suit you better.

"The purpose of the proposed N2 Slane Bypass is to overcome major road safety problems on the N2 route that passes through Slane Village. It is required to overcome the inadequacies of the existing road network through provision of a local bypass of the village of Slane, where the existing road layout on the N2 is hazardous for traffic".

Sounds like "unfit for purpose" to me, but hey, I'm from Azerbaijan, what would I know?

tuathal wrote: »

Happy New Year to all. As we look forward to the An Bord Pleanala hearings into the fairytale Slane Bypass, we in Save Newgrange have some exciting news for you all, to start out the year in a positive manner.

Thanks for clarifying the situation, btw, since you previously refused to admit to being a SN member (or administrator, or indeed, founder).

Just one little question - if, as presumably (and hopefully) will happen, FF get decimated at the next election and FG or Labour, or a combination, get in power, will those who support the bypass then be the FG-led bypass campaign? Or do you expect the campaign to just wither away and die? And if it doesn't, will you then admit that you were wrong about it being FF led?

Amtmann · 18-01-2011 8:31pm

Whoa just a minute tuathal!

Before I start, I want to make clear that the moderators on this forum have ZERO problem with representatives from your organisation posting here. We welcome all viewpoints here, so long as they are presented in a suitable fashion - i.e. one that generates rational, calm discussion, devoid of antagonism, while remaining on topic and being open to all points of view. I just want to make that crystal clear from the outset.

Now, two points:

First, you may NOT post here if you insist on labelling, suggesting or snidely inferring that all proponents of the bypass are affiliated with Fianna Fáil. Now let me be very clear on this: if you suggest or intimate that here again, you will be banned. It is the worst sort of discussion and it will not be tolerated.

Second, a large part of your post is tabloidesque. I am referring specifically to the issue you raised regarding Nick Killian. This has nothing to do with the Slane Bypass, absolutely nothing, and I'll brook no contradiction on that. It is irrelevant to this thread and I do not know why you posted it. I do know one thing though - if you veer wildly off topic again, you will be banned.

Please post calmly and do not cast aspersions on other posters here, directly or indirectly. I have infracted you for your post, because it contravenes the 'baiting' rule in the charter.

nordydan · 18-01-2011 10:45pm

Agree with the above from Tremelo. Lets just say my support for the Slane Bypass is inversely proportional to my love of FF!

L1011 · 19-01-2011 10:32am

tuathal wrote: »

So build a new bridge, by all means.

Where? There's nowhere to build one anywhere near the existing one. Also, it wouldn't deal with the extreme safety issues of vehicles dealing with the hills.

The only way to build a new bridge is to bypass Slane.

jack presley · 19-01-2011 6:32pm

MYOB wrote: »

Where? There's nowhere to build one anywhere near the existing one. Also, it wouldn't deal with the extreme safety issues of vehicles dealing with the hills.

The only way to build a new bridge is to bypass Slane.

That's the problem with objectors to infrastructure projects in this country. They come up with these off the cuff suggestions without actually thinking of whether they are feasible or not.

Slane Resident · 19-01-2011 9:26pm

Oh believe me, JP, you have no idea.

So far some of the ideas mooted on the Save Newgrange forum have included:

a) An elevated electric light rail system. Just for Slane.
b) Digging up Slane village to put the traffic underneath which, according to the person making the suggestion, could be done for much less than the cost of building the bypass. I think his estimate was €100,000, I have the post somewhere. This was pre-building bust, by the way.
c) An overpass where the traffic can go over Slane. I'm unsure what bit of Slane exactly it would go over, or how, but we won't let that stop us.
d) A different bridge. Somewhere else. (Ignoring the fact that any other bridge would probably end up closer to Newgrange than the existing one).

As another poster on another site said, road safety in Slane is a real problem, which needs real solutions, now, not more "pie-in-the-sky" and "if only" solutions. Concrete solutions, fully implementable, now.

L1011 · 19-01-2011 9:47pm

Also, this thread reminded me of how I've been accused of being both an FF and a Green member on this subforum alone. Interesting seeing as I'm a paid up member of another party entirely...

Chris_5339762 · 19-01-2011 10:31pm

De-trunking the N2 completely and removing 'M' status from the M2 should be the first step.

Really, the M2 (oh look a motorway) funnelling traffic into Slane is intolerable and the Ashbourne bypass should never have become a motorway for that reason.

That does mean improving connections to the other side of Slane would be required (say from the M1 and M3 though the logistics would be bad).

In a sense, Slane is the closest we have to the UKs A303 at Stonehenge; although the traffic jams arent as bad.

L1011 · 19-01-2011 10:39pm

The A303 at Stonehenge doesn't come close in danger stakes, though.

Expecting traffic to go down a steep hill and navigate 90 degree bends irrespective of the one way system is ridiculous. Even if the N2 was detrunked, Slane needs a second bridge - and theres nowhere to put one in the town. Many towns on R roads eventually need bypassing (Clane, Ratoath, Lusk, Graiugenamanagh come to mind as recently done ones).

Slane Resident · 20-01-2011 3:24pm

The deaths at Slane bridge were happening long, long before the N2 at Ashbourne was improved. The bridge simply isn't suitable for the type of traffic that now traverses it, it was designed for horse traffic. It's just completely unsuitable for large volumes of HGV traffic.

Which makes this advertising campaign extremely ironic:

http://www.dixontransport.com/gallery.html

I can't remember how to insert a picture, maybe somebody else will be able to. If you scroll down though, you'll see a fleet of Dixon HGVs travelling through Slane and across the bridge, and it's basically a step-by-step illustration of just how unsuitable the road is for HGV traffic.

road_high · 21-01-2011 1:20am

MYOB wrote: »

Many towns on R roads eventually need bypassing (Clane, Ratoath, Lusk, Graiugenamanagh come to mind as recently done ones).

Got one about 3 year ago

. Very lucky indeed to get one as well.

veryangryman · 21-01-2011 9:45am

mfitzy wrote: »

Got one about 3 year ago . Very lucky indeed to get one as well.

Clane is also bypassed (albeit terribly).

L1011 · 21-01-2011 10:36am

lads, that was a list of tiwns on R roads that HAVE been bypassed not ones that need it...

Tech3 · 27-01-2011 4:04pm

Hearing on Slane bypass due to start next month

The oral hearing into the proposed Slane Bypass will begin on 15th February in the Boyne Valley Hotel, Drogheda.

An Bord Pleanala confirmed the date last week for the hearing on the route of the proposed N2 bypass.

The roads would divert up to 10,000 vehicles a day away from Slane bridge, the scene of numerous fatal accidents over the years.

The planning board will hold a preliminary meeting in Drogheda’s Boyne Valley Hotel next Wednesday to acertain how many people want to make submissions to the main oral hearing.

Cllr Wayne Harding has welcomed the oral hearings, pointing out that Slane bridge has been the scene of numerous traffic accidents which has claimed the lives of 22 people over the years. “Another milestone has been reached in what has been along journey. I am very happy with what will be extensive consultation in relation to the proposed route. I believe that the enormous amount of further information submitted clears up a lot of the issues that have grown up around the application,” he said.

“I fully respect the independence of the board, but will be making the point that this year’s winter only strenghtens the argument for the bypass. It was impassable on many days during the cold spell, the western wall of Slane bridge partially collapsed due to what engineers believe was frost, and subsidence on the Mill Hill caused an emergency road closure. This is unacceptable for a national primary route,” he said.

Deputy Shane McEntee said the hearing was another step towards the new bridge and bypass being built.

“This new bridge is a number one priority for me. It has taken so long to get this far and every new development is a step in the right direction. I am hoping that once this oral hearing has taken place, the people of Slane will be one step closer to getting the new bridge they so desperately want and need.

“The closing of the bridge this week due to roadworks is just another indication of how necessary a new bridge is. Thousands of people have been inconvenienced and have had to take alternative routes, many of which are on small back roads. It has put extra time on their journeys, as well as extra pressure on the smaller back roads, which cannot cope with the huge level of traffic. A new modern bridge would put an end to disruption like this,” he said.

Senator Dominic Hannigan said he would be adding his support to the Slane bypass campaign and stressed how important building the bypass is to the people of Slane.

“Too many lives have been lost already and there have been too many times when tragedy has only narrowly been avoided. The people of Slane and their children need this bypass,” said Senator Hannigan.

“As I am very much in favour of the bypass, I will be informing the board of my intentions to make an oral submission.”

He added: “The first week will be spent looking at how the proposed bypass will contribute to the improvement of traffic in Slane. The archaeological implications, including the fact that the proposed route for the bypass is 500m from the buffer zone around the World Heritage Site at Brú na Bóinne, will be considered in the second week,” he said.

Meanwhile, the Save Newgrange campaign has requested a postponement of the oral hearing until after the general election.

Spokesperson Vincent Salafia pointed out that the Oireachtas Transport Committee was to hold hearings in February. He said the planning board had a legal duty to consider the committee hearings, as part of the planning process, and therefore the Bord Pleanala hearing should take place after the Dail hearings.

“It is also unfair to expect stakeholders to participate in two sets of hearing simultaneously,” he added.

http://www.meathchronicle.ie/news/meatheast/articles/2011/01/26/4002824-hearing-on-slane-bypass-due-to-start-next-month/

L1011 · 27-01-2011 7:15pm

Vincent Rentaprotestor just desperately clutching at the hope of another delay there.

spacetweek · 02-02-2011 5:27pm

MYOB wrote: »

Vincent Rentaprotestor just desperately clutching at the hope of another delay there.

I know he's involved, but it still galls me to see him quoted in reference to the bypass. This protest of his is even worse than the M3 because there is even less evidence that any archaeological structures will be impinged upon than there was for the Tara valley. He's just a protest tourist, following road projects around the country in a van like a Grateful Dead fan.

Slane Resident · 08-02-2011 6:18pm

I have posted a breakdown of the archaeological impact taken directly from the EIS somewhere on boards but I'm not sure where it is.

There are 44 areas of archaeological significance within 500 metres of the proposed road. Of those 44, 33 are to have no predicted impact.

Of the remaining 11, the old Dublin-Slane road will have a minor negative visual impact, but after mitigation it will have a positive impact.

There is a possible demesne landscape feature in Crewbane, an early medieval rectangular enclosure, a potential archaeological site in Slane, townland boundaries of potential pre-17th century date, potential archaeological sites at Fennor/Cullen, another potential archaeological site (HC95) which will all be excavated and which is deemed to have positive impact.

The River Boyne flood plain will be excavated, any archaeological features recorded prior to construction, and impact after mitigation is deemed to be positive.

There is a site of buildings in Slane (HC10). There is deemed to be no impact as features have already been removed. No impact.

So the only area of potential negative impact is the World Heritage Site itself and in relation to this the EIS states

"Type of impact: Indirect, slight visual impact.
Significance and quality of impact: Slight negative
Description: Boyne Valley UNESCO World Heritage Site
Mitigation proposals: Impacts should be minimised by Landscape mitigations measures (See Chapter 8), and through sensitive design.
Impact after Mitigation: Slight residual impact."

A look at the "before" and "after" photographs of the area on the EIS show that the view will be basically unchanged. In the distance it might be possible to make out part of the new bridge but it is difficult to make out and in fact, one of the Save Newgrange supporters accused a person who posted them of having posted identical pictures, until the very miniscule differences between the two pictures was pointed out. Sensitive planting should mitigate things further.

marmurr1916 · 16-02-2011 11:08am

According to engineers, one of the reasons for the Slane bridge collapse was constant, heavy traffic:

CONSTANT HEAVY traffic on Slane bridge appears to have been why it partially collapsed last month, an oral hearing by An Bord Pleanála into a proposed bypass of Slane village heard yesterday.

At the time, Meath County Council said the collapse of a stone wall on the western facade of the bridge was due to icy weather.

However, yesterday Seamus Mac Gearailt of Roughan O’Donovan engineers, which oversaw the selection of the bypass route on behalf of the council, said “it appears to have been due to heavy traffic loading over years”.

The council is seeking permission from the planning board to build a 3.5km dual-carriageway at a cost of €46 million to the east of the village. The route will take it some 500m from the buffer zone to Brú na Bóinne, a Unesco world heritage site that includes Newgrange, Knowth and Dowth.

Mr Mac Gearailt also told the hearing, chaired by planning inspector Michael Walsh, that it was not just Slane bridge that posed risks to traffic but all of the road layout through the village.

The N2 has steep hills on both approaches to Slane bridge and it also intersects with the main Drogheda to Navan road in the middle of the village.

Mr Mac Gearailt said Slane had the “longest and most severe descent on any national primary route”.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0216/1224289928321.html

Slane Resident · 17-02-2011 8:22pm

Slane residents and members of various Slane community groups gave oral submissions to the An Bord Pleanala hearing into the Slane Bypass today.

Very poignant testimony was given by those who have been involved in serious accidents, those who have been bereaved, those who have assisted at the scene of accidents, and by Slane people who described how difficult it is living in Slane in constant danger from our road.

A very emotive presentation was given on behalf of the local school, both from the Principal and from a member of the Parent's Association, in relation to the difficulties experienced in getting children to and from the school safely.

Unfortunately none of the objectors to the road deemed it necessary to attend to hear this testimony.

In the afternoon it was the turn of Mr. John Rogers, S.C. to set out his objections to the road. Unfortunately there was some confusion when it transpired that the road which Mr. Rogers was referring to, in a map of the four considered routes of the road, when he queried why this particular road had been chosen, turned out to, in fact, be one of the rejected routes and not the actual chosen route.

After clarification by Meath County Council who produced an overlay of the maps to verify that another road, Route B, was the one chosen, Mr. Rogers continued with his submission in which he expressed concern as to the safety of hooter swans who graze on a field near his house. Unfortunately he did not make mention of the safety of the local people, but this was covered very adequately and emotionally earlier in the day by the residents of Slane themselves.

Slane Resident · 19-02-2011 10:42pm

Poor reporting by the Irish Times in relation to Senator Dominic Hannigan's evidence given yesterday at the oral hearing.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0219/1224290285580.html

The report states that Senator Hannigan, referring to the cost/benefit analysis, stated that it was 3:1, so "for every three euro we spend, we'd get back one". In fact what he stated was for that for every euro we spend, we'd get back three, which is twice the benefit as the Metro North project which is 1.5/1.6:1.

He did say that meant that in terms of bang for your buck, in the Slane bypass you get twice the value as Metro North.

Environmentalist Peter Sweetman, on behalf of groups concerned with natural habitats, said the board could not make a proper decision on the basis of the information before it. He said the information was “flawed” because of what he claimed were inadequacies, including evidence in relation to bats and swans – both of which are protected species.
Maria Meagher asked: “When will we be given the same level of protection as swans and bats? We feel we are an endangered species.”

Chris_5339762 · 19-02-2011 11:37pm

Ah so thats where Peter Sweetman is thesedays. I see hes taken his special breed of environmentalism away from Galway and New Ross and now has his gaze fixed firmly on Slane.

Amtmann · 20-02-2011 2:03am

Indeed. He must do a fair amount of driving on roads he's objected to over the years.

lucernarian · 20-02-2011 7:57pm

Dominic Hannigan forgot to mention where he got his 1.5:1 Cost-Benefit ratio from... There are other threads dedicated to that topic however.

tuathal · 23-02-2011 4:34pm

spacetweek wrote: »

I know he's involved, but it still galls me to see him quoted in reference to the bypass. This protest of his is even worse than the M3 because there is even less evidence that any archaeological structures will be impinged upon than there was for the Tara valley. He's just a protest tourist, following road projects around the country in a van like a Grateful Dead fan.

It's all over for this leftover delusion of the Celtic Tiger:

Heritage findings at Slane being ‘ignored’

The Irish Times - Wednesday, February 23, 2011
ELAINE KEOGH

MEATH COUNTY Council has been accused of ignoring the magnitude of the findings of an international expert who says the Slane bypass could threaten the status of Brú na Bóinne as a Unesco world heritage site. Dr Douglas Comer had also said the proposed road breaches the council’s own development plan, which says development must protect the amenity, views and landscape of the monuments in the world heritage site which includes Newgrange, Knowth and Dowth. At the public hearing into the plans for the Slane bypass, Colm Mac Eochaidh SC, for former attorney general John Rogers who lives near the buffer zone for the world heritage site, asked whether they would be told if Dr Comer’s report constituted “significant further information” and as such it should be advertised to the public.

Dr Comer said the landscape’s heritage value was “as high as it gets” and the building of a road at or near a world heritage site was “the most problematic of all possible developments”. Of the effects of the proposed bypass, “none can be viewed as non-significant”. The council is seeking permission from the planning board to build a 3.5km dual carriageway at a cost of €46 million. It retained Dr Comer on advice from An Bord Pleanála to assess independently the heritage impact on the site of the proposed road. He had advised the hearing that “almost certainly,” there would be a visit by experts from Unesco asking about gaps in information on the proposed road. The three likely outcomes of that process included being de-listed as a world heritage site. He said “nowhere else in the world” had the monuments and continuity of settlement that was found at Brú na Bóinne.

Dr Comer also said he could not find any study on the implications of simply banning heavy goods vehicles from the village – proposed nearly two years ago – or a study on other alternatives to building the bypass. He added that the Boyne bridge on the M1 motorway was “without a doubt incompatible” with the landscape that led to Brú na Bóinne being inscribed by Unesco.

WRITE TO lettersed@irishtimes.com

(As for spacetweek's ignorant remarks about Mr Salafia, they smack of jealousy of his media profile. At least he is qualified to be issuing opinions on the environmental effects of roads, since he is a lecturer in environmental legislation. What qualifies spacetweek to be advising the Government on Transport 21, in his pro-roads web site? What's wrong with him? Not getting enough hits or media coverage?)

Irish and Proud · 24-02-2011 1:22am

...so heritage is the only consideration that should be accommodated? What about the local people in Slane, and the local people who need to get about - and I'm sure that there are local people who have trucks and (of course tractors) in the vicinity - with no bypass, they would either have to go through Slane, take a massive detour or take unsuitable back roads? What about the 22 people who died as a result of being forced through Slane and what about the structural damage being done to the town of Slane itself - do you actually care about the local people and those that died???

Both FG and Labour have shown support for this road and as far as I'm concerned, it will eventually go ahead and rightly so - otherwise it would show a massive failing in our democracy when the will of many people are denied by a few!

We really need to change our laws - it's ridiculous! :mad:

Son of Stupido · 24-02-2011 12:12pm

Slane plans pose 'no immediate danger'

RICHARD McCULLEN Irish Times 24th Feb 2011

THERE IS no immediate danger posed to the Brú na Bóinne site in Co Meath by plans to build a bypass of Slane village, according to a world heritage expert.
However, Dr Douglas Comer warned the project would be another intrusion on the site and if there were others in the future, they could undermine its designation as a world heritage site of outstanding universal value.
Dr Comer was replying to questions from Gerry Browner, senior architect with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, on the seventh day of an oral hearing by An Bord Pleanála into plans by Meath County Council for the bypass.
The proposed 3.5km dual carriageway, including a new bridge over the Boyne east of the village, would pass within 500 metres of a buffer zone around Brú na Bóinne which includes the ancient burial sites of Newgrange, Knowth and Dowth.
Supporters of the project claim the bypass and bridge are urgently needed to improve safety for locals in Slane, which has been the scene of at least 22 fatal road crashes.
Opponents say the new road and bridge would have a detrimental effect on the local landscape, especially the archaeological sites. Dr Comer said some features already intruded into the site, such as the M1 motorway and Boyne bridge, the cement factory chimneys at Platin and the new Indaver incinerator at Carranstown, Duleek.
He said if the bypass got the go-ahead, Unesco’s world heritage committee would likely send a fact-finding reactive monitoring mission to assess its impact on the Brú na Bóinne site. The committee might then decide there had been no deterioration to the site, place it on a list of endangered sites, or delist it.
Mr Browner added that the department had already received a yellow card from Unesco over the incinerator.

Slane Resident · 28-02-2011 12:04am

Dr. Comer stated quite specifically that the standard procedure, if the project goes ahead, will be that Unesco will send in a team to review the works. When a team goes in to any project, it has three options open to it; the status of the WHS remains intact, or they put it on an endangered list, or they strike it off. Those are the three options available to it, for any world heritage site.

What way is it reported? Dr. Comer states that BnB could lose it's world heritage status. Yes, or then again, it might not. He's not second-guessing the team. He's stating the options which are available to it. He also stated that provided there is no further ribbon development or visual incursions, he thinks BnB will be just fine.

Report from Richard McCullen is a much more balanced and informed account of what actually went on at the hearing.

Sponge Bob · 28-02-2011 12:24am

There may have been complaints about the usual fella the Times sends to these hearings ....who tends not to listen to all the evidence and who produces the most dreadfully partisan rubbish you will even see in the Times.

Slane Resident · 02-03-2011 3:49pm

Alex Mountcharles made a submission yesterday in which he reiterated his support for the bypass and in particular the chosen route, and addressed the issue of the proposed alternative western route which has been suggested by some observers as a better alternative, and stated that from the Slane Castle point of view the western route would be catastrophic.

He also spoke of the difficulties of living so close to the N2 himself, and the dangers to his young children if they get out the front door.

Headline was "Conyngham Family Oppose Slane Bypass".

In fact this is a direct quote from his submission:

"It is now clear that the only way to get the heavy volumes of traffic out of Slane village is to bypass it".

Also:

"For the reasons outlined above, we support the need for a bypass of Slane. If the Slane Castle estate is to continue and extend its role in the regeneration of Slane Village, then this bypass must follow the eastern route. We want to see Slane re-emerge as a thriving tourist destination that functions not as a disparate entity to Bru na Boinne but as the natural gateway to this outstanding World Heritage site that lies within its own parish".

lucernarian · 03-03-2011 10:13am

It seems Henry Mountcharles himself took umbrage at the Indo's poor reporting:

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/slane-clarification-2563696.html

spacetweek · 03-03-2011 6:07pm

I don't advise the Gov in my "pro-roads" site, I merely comment on its plans. My site is not pro-roads, it is meant to be purely informational and does not promote a particular point of view.

I would venture that since Salafia is an environmental lecturer (didn't know that), that he may ignore the other reasons to build this, primarily road safety. There is nothing more precious than people's lives.

Here are my rebuttals to the three key objections we've had so far:

HGV ban instead of bypass - There is no alternative route for HGVs, town still would have high car volumes, and many road deaths are probably car-to-car - so they would still occur;
Swans affected by noise - In a choice between people's lives and the comfort of swans, guess who wins;
Impact on the views and context of the valley - I'm not aware that the M1 Boyne bridge is visible from the site and the Slane bypass lies outside the protected area. I don't know how UNESCO could rescind the status when there will be no physical impact. You cannot cleanse the area of all man-made structures.

There are four things to consider here. They are from different spheres of life so it's important to take a holistic approach. I've ordered them in what I consider to be their importance:

- Road safety. The town has had a very high traffic death rate. This must end;
- Quality of life of the residents. The townspeople have a high traffic volume, including a high percentage of truck traffic, passing through a medieval street layout which is wholly inappropriate for modern needs and was obsolete centuries ago. Even in the days of horses and carts I'm sure many of them would have found the gradients rather steep;
- The impact on heritage structures. Covered above;
- The impact on the environment. As I see it, this is negligible. The traffic already exists and won't be spurred by this bypass, and it is long-term strategic priority to direct as much traffic as possible along the M1 instead of the N2. There will never be a need to expand the bypass once built. As for swans, etc., I leave that to the EIS.

@Tuathal, you're up.

Pete_Cavan · 03-03-2011 9:06pm

spacetweek wrote: »

I don't advise the Gov in my "pro-roads" site, I merely comment on its plans. My site is not pro-roads, it is meant to be purely informational and does not promote a particular point of view.

I would venture that since Salafia is an environmental lecturer (didn't know that), that he may ignore the other reasons to build this, primarily road safety. There is nothing more precious than people's lives.

Here are my rebuttals to the three key objections we've had so far:

HGV ban instead of bypass - There is no alternative route for HGVs, town still would have high car volumes, and many road deaths are probably car-to-car - so they would still occur;
Swans affected by noise - In a choice between people's lives and the comfort of swans, guess who wins;
Impact on the views and context of the valley - I'm not aware that the M1 Boyne bridge is visible from the site and the Slane bypass lies outside the protected area. I don't know how UNESCO could rescind the status when there will be no physical impact. You cannot cleanse the area of all man-made structures.

There are four things to consider here. They are from different spheres of life so it's important to take a holistic approach. I've ordered them in what I consider to be their importance:

- Road safety. The town has had a very high traffic death rate. This must end;
- Quality of life of the residents. The townspeople have a high traffic volume, including a high percentage of truck traffic, passing through a medieval street layout which is wholly inappropriate for modern needs and was obsolete centuries ago. Even in the days of horses and carts I'm sure many of them would have found the gradients rather steep;
- The impact on heritage structures. Covered above;
- The impact on the environment. As I see it, this is negligible. The traffic already exists and won't be spurred by this bypass, and it is long-term strategic priority to direct as much traffic as possible along the M1 instead of the N2. There will never be a need to expand the bypass once built. As for swans, etc., I leave that to the EIS.

@Tuathal, you're up.

My issue is, and always has been, the cost of the road. Why spend close to €50m on a road which sits less than 15km two motorways which have each cost over a billion euro? The new road will (as the existing road is) be used as a rat-run for toll dodgers.

As Type 2 Dual carriageway, the bypass is way over spec'd. It will cause more traffic to divert off the M1 at junction 12 and travel through Collon, bypass Slane and then down the M2 for free. If traffic through Collon starts increasing then there'll be pressure to extend the DC north from Slane and bypassing Collon and also to complete DC from the end of the M2 with the Slane bypass.

Most of the traffic that passes through Slane has no business being there because everywhere north of Slane is easily accessed from the M1. It is going to be a few years before the NRA has the money to build this bypass so in the meantime they should look at cheaper alternatives. The N2 north of Ashbounre should be detrunked and speeds reduced to 80kpm, with plenty of speed cameras. If there is still problems with traffic in Slane the bypass should proceed, built as standard single carriageway.

There is no need for DC because, as we keep hearing, the purpose of the bypass is to provide a new bridge and reduce traffic in the town, not to reduce travel times. Single carriageway would be cheaper and help prevent the need for further upgrades on the N2. In any event, the N2 does not need to be a national primary route because all the destinations on it can be served by the M1 (and improving N33).

L1011 · 03-03-2011 9:26pm

A national route is not a "rat run for toll dodgers". Using the N2 to access things on the N2 is not "toll dodging"

N2 - Slane Bypass [planning decision pending]

Comments