Pearse stadium floodlights

howyanow

Anyone know if planning permission was granted? local press stated that a decision was to be made last week, haven't heard anything yet.

snubbleste

Call the city council's planning section in the morning and ask.

Sconsey

The council have delayed the decision again, requesting further clarifications on the plan. This is the fourth time I believe this has happened since the plan was submitted back in 2008. GAA have another six months to respond.

3fullback

It should be granted.

Sconsey

It should not be granted.

3fullback

Sconsey wrote: »

It should not be granted.

Why, what have you got against the odd evening league fixture during the boring old months of january and feb, it would be a great fri or sat night enterainment. i'm talking maybe 4 or 5 games that would be fixed under lights there would be no training , at maybe 2.5hours for each game thats in or around 10hours a year how can anyone disagree with that ?

Sconsey

All right you asked

The application is for games and training so it would be lot more than a few hours a week (I've read the application, have you?). The lights are off the frigging scale in terms of brightness, they want them four times higher than the height of the roof of the stand, light spillage into houses would be crazy (Disclaimer: I live in one of those houses), the temporary lights they used in the past are evidence of this, along with the fact that the GAA gave no evidence of a study of light pollution as part of the submission.

There is no parking available, people just park as close to the stadium as they can, the cops sometimes put out bollards, they are ignored by the cars, the neighbourhoods nearby are gridlocked, can't get out of our own houses. By the way the GAA are in breech of current planning permission as a result, but they don't give a toss and council are too weak to enforce their own rules.

As said earlier the floodlight masts are way too high to plonk down in a resedential area, totally out of keeping with everything else and would cast shadows into houses.

Now people will say 'but the stadium was there before the houses', that's balls for two reasons, firstly there were houses there before the staduim (when most of that area was a golf course) and anyway, just because one was there before the other it doesn't mean you can build whatever you want to detriment of existing buildings/residences. And I'm not a lone nutjob on this a huge proportion of residences in the area have objected.

The Galway County board are clowns, the last thing they should be allowed do is play with lights at night. They have treated the local residents with contempt in the past and continue to do so.

3fullback

Sconsey wrote: »

All right you asked

The application is for games and training so it would be lot more than a few hours a week (I've read the application, have you?). The lights are off the frigging scale in terms of brightness, they want them four times higher than the height of the roof of the stand, light spillage into houses would be crazy (Disclaimer: I live in one of those houses), the temporary lights they used in the past are evidence of this, along with the fact that the GAA gave no evidence of a study of light pollution as part of the submission.

There is no parking available, people just park as close to the stadium as they can, the cops sometimes put out bollards, they are ignored by the cars, the neighbourhoods nearby are gridlocked, can't get out of our own houses. By the way the GAA are in breech of current planning permission as a result, but they don't give a toss and council are too weak to enforce their own rules.

As said earlier the floodlight masts are way too high to plonk down in a resedential area, totally out of keeping with everything else and would cast shadows into houses.

Now people will say 'but the stadium was there before the houses', that's balls for two reasons, firstly there were houses there before the staduim (when most of that area was a golf course) and anyway, just because one was there before the other it doesn't mean you can build whatever you want to detriment of existing buildings/residences. And I'm not a lone nutjob on this a huge proportion of residences in the area have objected.

The Galway County board are clowns, the last thing they should be allowed do is play with lights at night. They have treated the local residents with contempt in the past and continue to do so.

Touché

skelliser

the serial objectors of rockbarton/mannix road object again, surprise surprise!

the stadium was there long before your houses, buyer beware and all that! this is only for 4/5 nights a year as well!

Sconsey

skelliser wrote: »

the serial objectors of rockbarton/mannix road object again, surprise surprise!

the stadium was there long before your houses, buyer beware and all that! this is only for 4/5 nights a year as well!

And the uninformed continue to post on boards as if they know what they are talking about..../applause

Mars Bar

They should have left the whole thing in Tuam!

Would have been all their problems sorted...

gordongekko

Sconsey wrote: »

All right you asked

The application is for games and training so it would be lot more than a few hours a week (I've read the application, have you?). The lights are off the frigging scale in terms of brightness, they want them four times higher than the height of the roof of the stand, light spillage into houses would be crazy (Disclaimer: I live in one of those houses), the temporary lights they used in the past are evidence of this, along with the fact that the GAA gave no evidence of a study of light pollution as part of the submission.

There is no parking available, people just park as close to the stadium as they can, the cops sometimes put out bollards, they are ignored by the cars, the neighbourhoods nearby are gridlocked, can't get out of our own houses. By the way the GAA are in breech of current planning permission as a result, but they don't give a toss and council are too weak to enforce their own rules.

As said earlier the floodlight masts are way too high to plonk down in a resedential area, totally out of keeping with everything else and would cast shadows into houses.

Now people will say 'but the stadium was there before the houses', that's balls for two reasons, firstly there were houses there before the staduim (when most of that area was a golf course) and anyway, just because one was there before the other it doesn't mean you can build whatever you want to detriment of existing buildings/residences. And I'm not a lone nutjob on this a huge proportion of residences in the area have objected.

The Galway County board are clowns, the last thing they should be allowed do is play with lights at night. They have treated the local residents with contempt in the past and continue to do so.

To be honest you do sound like a nut. Its not as if there will be matches on at 3-4 in the morning. The matches and training will be long over at 10pm. Its hardly excessive. The football board have a fine facility in loughgeorge and the hurling board are building one in Athenry so the amount of training going on in the stadium will be minimal.

As regards the parking issue. This can be sorted easily enough with some cop on and a bit of planning. Its not surely a valid issue to stop the building of some floodlights.

Sconsey

If I sound like a nut it is because the guys running the stadium have driven me nuts! and it's not just me, it's hundreds of people living in the vicinity. They have treated locals like sh1t in the past and are paying the price now...e.g: yeah it would be fairly easy to fix the parking problems, well it's about 10 years on now and they still have not made any attempt to fix it.

Arnold Layne

Sconsey wrote: »

All right you asked

By the way the GAA are in breech of current planning permission as a result, but they don't give a toss and council are too weak to enforce their own rules.

Am I correct in saying that the planning permission was provided in the first p;ace for the redevelopment of the stadium as the GAA said that they would implement a park & ride facility from the outskirts of the city?

The GAA Officials have shown their contempt for the law in the past when a van selling tickets blocked a resident's driveway. When the Garda asked the person to move the van, he was told that the ticket vendor only took orders from the GAA. The Garda left him alone afetr that instead of hauling his ass off to the Garda Station. I don't have a link to this story, but it was well documented in the local papers, Advertiser and City Tribune) at the time.

The best story I heard occurred last year when a person attending the match with his family parked his car in a resident's driveway as it was clear at the time. The resident returned while the match was on and subsequently blocked the offending car. He refused to move it until late that night, eventhough the person returning from the match had children with him.

If the GAA want floodlights in a stadium, they should have developed the Tuam stadium instead

Wompa1

Sconsey wrote: »

If I sound like a nut it is because the guys running the stadium have driven me nuts! and it's not just me, it's hundreds of people living in the vicinity. They have treated locals like sh1t in the past and are paying the price now...e.g: yeah it would be fairly easy to fix the parking problems, well it's about 10 years on now and they still have not made any attempt to fix it.

Is the setup not similar to Terryland Park?...there were always cars parked around Dun when i lived there and I was right by the stadium...didn't find it all that bad. The lights were on quite a bit too

AdamantApproach

Arnold Layne wrote: »

Am I correct in saying that the planning permission was provided in the first p;ace for the redevelopment of the stadium as the GAA said that they would implement a park & ride facility from the outskirts of the city?

The GAA Officials have shown their contempt for the law in the past when a van selling tickets blocked a resident's driveway. When the Garda asked the person to move the van, he was told that the ticket vendor only took orders from the GAA. The Garda left him alone afetr that instead of hauling his ass off to the Garda Station. I don't have a link to this story, but it was well documented in the local papers, Advertiser and City Tribune) at the time.

The best story I heard occurred last year when a person attending the match with his family parked his car in a resident's driveway as it was clear at the time. The resident returned while the match was on and subsequently blocked the offending car. He refused to move it until late that night, eventhough the person returning from the match had children with him.

If the GAA want floodlights in a stadium, they should have developed the Tuam stadium instead

If you could post a link that verifies some of this nonsense I would really appreciate it.

There are houses around Tuam stadium too you know. Very much a NIMBY attitude. I don't see why residents think that they have the right to object to be honest.

Sconsey

AdamantApproach wrote: »

If you could post a link that verifies some of this nonsense I would really appreciate it.

There are houses around Tuam stadium too you know. Very much a NIMBY attitude. I don't see why residents think that they have the right to object to be honest.

I know the original redevelopment was granted planning based on a number of conditions, one was a proper parking plain to be put in place and to provide parking in the Prarie. Never happened, surprise surprise.

The two stories are true and are reported to the guards, I think if you are really interested in the details you should search blogspot for a blog called 'pearsestadium' (I don't have the link handy) it documents a portion of the crap that they have pulled in the last few years.

You don't think anyone has the right to object? seriously?

Wompa1

Wompa1 wrote: »

Is the setup not similar to Terryland Park?...there were always cars parked around Dun when i lived there and I was right by the stadium...didn't find it all that bad. The lights were on quite a bit too

I doubt the numbers would be anywhere near the same.
Also the the Dyke road car park is relatively close.

Mars Bar

AdamantApproach wrote: »

If you could post a link that verifies some of this nonsense I would really appreciate it.

There are houses around Tuam stadium too you know. Very much a NIMBY attitude. I don't see why residents think that they have the right to object to be honest.

I do know, it takes me 2 mins to get from my front door to the stadium gates.
I don't think there would have been much objection here because what the Galway matches brought to the town was a lot. Businesses got a good day and there is ample parking.

skelliser

there where no objections to either the terryland and sportsground floodlights.
Both in heavly populated areas, plus the sportsground lights are on until 10pm at night.


The fact is that the residents in salthill where against the redevelopment in the first place, plus saying that the paerie would be turned into a carpark is nonsense! Salthill gaa club and pearse stadium are seperate organisations!!

Whats the difference between the residents at the above sites; teryland, college road and rockbarton?
NIMBY!

Sconsey

skelliser wrote: »

there where no objections to either the terryland and sportsground floodlights.
Both in heavly populated areas, plus the sportsground lights are on until 10pm at night.


The fact is that the residents in salthill where against the redevelopment in the first place, plus saying that the paerie would be turned into a carpark is nonsense! Salthill gaa club and pearse stadium are seperate organisations!!

Whats the difference between the residents at the above sites; teryland, college road and rockbarton?
NIMBY!

You seem to have your mind firmly made up there skelliser, so you keep chanting your NIMBY! mantra to yourself and ignore facts that don't suit you. Actually you probably have no idea of the facts do you? if I was arsed I'd check to see if there were actually any objections to the two sites you mentioned, how exactly do you know there were no objections?

Terryland and Sportsground may have local residents that don't give a damn I don't know, I'm not going to speak for them, but you are not comparing like with like.
Residents were never too happy about the redevlopment, it was the GAA who said they would use the Prarie for parking to meet planning requirements (did I mention Galway County board will say anything they want in a planning application, truth is not an issue for them apparently).

skelliser

Lets call a spade a spade here, Sconesy
Where you against the original redevelopment?

Your only gripe seems to be the parking situation, i agree with you there, adequate parking plans have not really been implemented but i get the impression that you are part of the original residents who where against the redevelopment in the first place, am i wrong?

I know for a fact there was no objections to the sportsground floodlights, only stipulation was that the lights be turned off immedialty after matches, race nights.

Bosco boy

I wonder if a compensation scheme for local residents was put in place by the GAA and pearse stadium would the fears of the locals be allayed?

Sconsey

Bosco boy wrote: »

I wonder if a compensation scheme for local residents was put in place by the GAA and pearse stadium would the fears of the locals be allayed?

No! compensation of two tickets to Westlife in the pi$$ing rain would be more like a penance

Arnold Layne

Sconsey wrote: »

No! compensation of two tickets to Westlife in the pi$$ing rain would be more like a penance

No resideants got tickets for any of the gigs. Rumours (unsubstantiated) are that the promoters allocated tickets to residents via the local GAA which were then given to its own members.

Sconsey

Sconsey wrote: »

I know the original redevelopment was granted planning based on a number of conditions, one was a proper parking plain to be put in place and to provide parking in the Prarie. Never happened, surprise surprise.

Come on there is about 2 or 3 matches a year in pearse that parking/traffic could be a problem are you really that awkward that you cannot but up with a bit of inconvenience for a few hours a couple of Sundays a year. I dont even see the problem with people parking around the area once they dont block drive ways etc.

The flood lights should be granted also. It will make for a nice evening out to watch a game on a saturday evening and will cause little of no inconvience. I'm afraid if you want to live in a city you have to be prepared to accept progress and development. How would you survive if you lived near a stadium in a UK city for instance where there are games twice a week where up to 50000 people decent on the ground.

jenno86

Sure if he light is spilling into your house turn off your lights and save money on electricity! Simples! Everyone is happy!

Sconsey

Cecilia Magnificent Drummer wrote: »

Come on there is about 2 or 3 matches a year in pearse that parking/traffic could be a problem are you really that awkward that you cannot but up with a bit of inconvenience for a few hours a couple of Sundays a year. I dont even see the problem with people parking around the area once they dont block drive ways etc.

The flood lights should be granted also. It will make for a nice evening out to watch a game on a saturday evening and will cause little of no inconvience. I'm afraid if you want to live in a city you have to be prepared to accept progress and development. How would you survive if you lived near a stadium in a UK city for instance where there are games twice a week where up to 50000 people decent on the ground.

Well it goes to show how much you know really, you are no different from the vast majority who think there is no problem and people are moaning for no reason.

You say there are 2 or 3 matches a year where the traffic is a problem? I am guessing you are referring to championship games, these games ironically are not the worst because the guards are actually out and about. It's the club matches, Saturday evening and all day Sunday that are a real pain in the ass, but according to you they cause little or no inconvenience? I am speaking from experience, how about you? Too many people assume they know what is going on when they really don't have a clue. The GAA have made many commitments which they have not lived up to. Their organisation is a mess, and as a result it is having a negative effect on quality of life for local residents, there is no way I am going to stand by while they try to extend that bullsh1t to night-times as well as day.


I'll bet the games you refer to in England are not managed/organised by dummies, the Pearse stadium games are. I'll bet the English stadiums managers actually provided the infrastructure that they committed to in their planning application. I'd even go so far as to say the English police probably make a descent effort to keep the roads clear during games, in Galway it's a different story.


So no, I disagree with you, the floodlights should not be granted. And that's just the parking, there are other reasons too but I don't want to repeat myself.
G'luck

toiletduck

Whatever about floodlights, I just hope that more use is gotten out of the stadium during Championship season this year. I see we'll get a fair few league games but it's a shame having it empty for backdoor fixtures.

Oh and somewhat related Doubts surround McHale Park floodlit opener

dec25532

Anyway, the long and the short of it is that Galway City Council have sought more information from the GAA authorities which means that any decision has been delayed for months. A decision was expected late last week.

charlie_says

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

dloob

skelliser wrote: »

Lets call a spade a spade here, Sconesy
Where you against the original redevelopment?

Your only gripe seems to be the parking situation, i agree with you there, adequate parking plans have not really been implemented but i get the impression that you are part of the original residents who where against the redevelopment in the first place, am i wrong?

I know for a fact there was no objections to the sportsground floodlights, only stipulation was that the lights be turned off immedialty after matches, race nights.

Maybe the difference is the sportsground and terryland management work with the residents?
The GAA on the other hand seem to have a nationwide policy of arrogantly dismissing residents concerns about their poorly located and serviced stadiums.

sgthighway

Maybe they should sell Pearse Stadium and allow a Halting Site there?

Arnold Layne

If the GAA could have sold the land they would have done so years ago to properety developers when land prices were high.

damalo

There's nothing wrong with GAA. There's nothing wrong with watching a game of a Sunday afternoon.

There is something wrong with:

1 - Flood lights. These do not belong in a built up area. They will be used more than 4/5 times a year. Read the planning.

2 - Parking is dire. My family home is 2 minutes from the pitch. People willfully disregard the law and park on private property, on people's lawns and in some cases residents cars have been damaged as a result of the parking problem.

When the original planning was provided, a traffic management scheme was agreed by the GAA. This has not been implemented. Even the local superintendant admits to that.

I love to see the stadium in use but I do not like to see the GAA ignoring what they previously signed up to. Its just not right no matter where you live. I regularly attend GAA fixtures and am not a killjoy. People's property and homes must be respected.

mikemac

I know the area though in Galway though not lived there. I was eastside in Galway!
But certainly was a Croke Park resident. We had a garda cordon on matchdays which worked extremely well. And we also cut out the messing of 11 different residents commitees. If you had an issue you went straight to Croke Park and you would be listened to.
Could this be implemented in Salthill? Why is there no cordon of the estates?

As regards floodlights, they won't just be on matchdays as they have to test them once installed. They'll be on for more evening testing then for matchdays in Pearse Stadium once installed
Lights didn't bother me but I can accept the residents concerns here

cremeegg

we have lights up back the slated shed at home and there was no polution from them... be god sure the cattle were in there element... sur.. i cant see the the problem here...

dec25532

cremeegg wrote: »

we have lights up back the slated shed at home and there was no polution from them... be god sure the cattle were in there element... sur.. i cant see the the problem here...

This comment is certainly not helpful to the whole Pearse Stadium conflict and you should apologise for it!
Hope you got fodder to the cattle during the cold snap though. Jaysus, hope the water supply didn't freeze to the slatted house because that would have been awkward. Have you many housed?

s_carnage

From reading through this thread I can certainly see the points and actually agree with the residents around Pierce stadium. By the way I live nowhere near Salthill! From travelling to games around the country I must also admit that facilities regarding parking around Pierce stadium has got to be some of the worst in this country. Its gone as far as if I was travelling to a game there I would just park in town and not even think about driving out to Salthill.

As regard to the argument about 50000 supporters conversing on stadiums in England every second weekend that just doesn't stand up. I've been to Old Trafford and other stadiums many times and there seems to be no problem regarding the parking or even the traffic after the games which seems to be controlled much much better than what you see in Galway.

I do think it was a ridiculous decision in the first place putting a stadium there without having measures in place for sufficient parking and proper traffic control measures. Anyone with a bit of forward thinking could easily foresee how built up that area was becoming.

s_carnage

s_carnage wrote: »

From travelling to games around the country I must also admit that facilities regarding parking around Pierce stadium has got to be some of the worst in this country. Its gone as far as if I was travelling to a game there I would just park in town and not even think about driving out to Salthill.

Its the same really at a lot of stadiums around the country. Mchale park = parking on grass/housing estates, Thurles = as above, Sligo = as above, Croke park = housing estates but usually a good walk away or where ever the car can be thrown for the day(unless you feel like paying the crazy parking fees around croker, no thanks), Tuam = side of the road/ housing estates.

cremeegg

dec25532 wrote: »

This comment is certainly not helpful to the whole Pearse Stadium conflict and you should apologise for it!
Hope you got fodder to the cattle during the cold snap though. Jaysus, hope the water supply didn't freeze to the slatted house because that would have been awkward. Have you many housed?

on reflection.. Indeed your right and i do apoligise...


146... The cattle will survive the cold snap.. no doubt. there a resilient bunch.. bit like the irish people...

ocho

Oh. My. F..king. God. Have you seen today's Tribune?

Why amn't I surprised at the sheer stupidity and the audacity of the GAA that they have (allegedly) forged a Garda signature on a traffic plan in the planning application.

I hope to God the person responsible is criminally prosecuted.


Planning probe into signature of 'Garda' on GAA document

January 15, 2010 - 9:09am
Validity of controversial Pearse Stadium application questioned by Superintendent



A senior Garda has ordered the GAA and Galway City Council to investigate a signature – purporting to be that of a Garda – which was submitted on a document by the Pearse Stadium Development Committee as part of a contentious planning application for floodlights at the stadium.

The Council has now called on the GAA to prove the validity of the traffic management plan document, and demanded to know who signed it and when.

The signature at the centre of the investigation is contained at the end of an official document from Pearse Stadium regarding transport and traffic arrangements during big matches and concerts.

Superintendent Noel Kelly of Salthill Garda Station called to the Planning Department at Galway City Council on January 6 to view the “alleged document”, after a report was made by a member of the public.

He has since written to the Council advising that the signature is not his, his Inspector’s or his Sergeant’s, and ordered them to establish who signed the document.

The document was submitted as an attachment to an official letter from An Garda Síochána, which was signed by Sergeant Karen Maloney of Salthill Station.

In his letter to the Council, Supt Kelly wrote: “At the Garda Station [the complainant] expressed concern over a document, which had been lodged by the Pearse Stadium Development Committee in response to queries from the Planning Office of Galway City Council. He believed that a Garda signature on the document entitled ‘Pearse Stadium – Transport/Traffic Arrangements’ was not correct.

“On the morning of January 6, 2010, I went to the planning section of Galway City Council to view the alleged document.

“Firstly, one has to view this document in conjunction with the letter from Sergeant Karen Maloney dated November 6, 2009. Sergeant Maloney had a phone conversation with [Tom Leonard of the Stadium Development Committee] to discuss traffic arrangements. The letter dated November 6, 2009 agrees with their traffic policy for all ‘major events’ held at Pearse Stadium. I have no problem with her [Sgt Maloney’s] letter.

“However, I have a concern with the document entitled ‘Pearse Stadium – Transport/Traffic Arrangements’ which is attached to Sergeant Maloney’s letter. This letter purports to be signed by a member of An Garda Síochána.

“The signature is not known to me. It is not mine; it is not my Inspectors or Sergeant Maloney’s signature. No other persons have authority to sign documents on behalf of An Garda Síochána. I would request that the source of the signature be established,” Supt Kelly wrote.

Now, the Council’s Director of Services for Planning, Tom Connell, has written to the Galway County Board pointing out that the documentation could be discounted unless its validity can be proven.

“An Garda Síochána has queried the validity of certain information supplied by the applicant in respect of traffic management arrangements agrees with the organisation.
For more read page 1 of this week's Galway City Tribune.

Wompa1

ocho wrote: »

Oh. My. F..king. God. Have you seen today's Tribune?

Why amn't I surprised at the sheer stupidity and the audacity of the GAA that they have (allegedly) forged a Garda signature on a traffic plan in the planning application.

I hope to God the person responsible is criminally prosecuted.


Planning probe into signature of 'Garda' on GAA document

The greatest scandal since the great Longford Town FC Lottery debacle!

alibabba

The plot thickens ... to a consistency that somewhat resembles sh1t

Sconsey

This is the kind of attitude the local GAA have.... 'sure why do we need a garda signature, we're the law round here'.

Hope people will have a little more understanding for the locals now they see the crap we have to live with from them.

clived2

I think its time we got some "good police" on this detail

Wompa1

Sconsey wrote: »

This is the kind of attitude the local GAA have.... 'sure why do we need a garda signature, we're the law round here'.

Hope people will have a little more understanding for the locals now they see the crap we have to live with from them.

*cough* Drama Queen!

Sconsey

Wompa1 wrote: »

*cough* Drama Queen!

/sarcasm/Well done sir, excellent contribution.

Do you have anything constructive to say or are you going to stick with the not-very-funny-comments?

Wompa1

Sconsey wrote: »

/sarcasm/Well done sir, excellent contribution.

Do you have anything constructive to say or are you going to stick with the not-very-funny-comments?

If it's ok with you I'll stick with the not-very-funny comments sir

You've swayed me, I say let the GAA do what they want! And to think I was thinking you were right. Also accept constructive critcism here. When you make broad allegations like you did it makes people less likely to be sympathetic towards your cause and think your a crackpot

Sconsey

Wompa1 wrote: »

If it's ok with you I'll stick with the not-very-funny comments sir

You've swayed me, I say let the GAA do what they want! And to think I was thinking you were right. Also accept constructive critcism here. When you make broad allegations like you did it makes people less likely to be sympathetic towards your cause and think your a crackpot

It's ok with me if you stick to the stupid comments but not sure why you'd want to, you're obviously not stupid

Am fairly sure it's the guards and the planning authority that are making the allegations, at least that's what I was referring to, but anyway point taken.

cremeegg

stonesy .. if they lowered the lights would you ok with that... or is it a larger issue at play?