N2 - Slane Bypass [planning decision pending]

Irish and Proud

spacetweek wrote: »

antoobrien wrote: »

Apparently it's too close to the "buffer zone" around Newgrange .

In fairness it was the opponents who said that, ABP said it was due to "concerns about heritage". Possibly archaeological digs unearthed something along the alignment?

My last post came in just after yours - I must read into the decision in more detail.

antoobrien

spacetweek wrote: »

In fairness it was the opponents who said that, ABP said it was due to "concerns about heritage".

That's how breakingnews reported it.

The full decision available on the ABP website

Here's a very brief summary:
a) The proposed development is within the "viewshed" (what does that mean wrt planning) of a UNESCO world heritage site (Boyne Valley)
b) Since it's a permanent feature, it's only appropriate if the board feels that all other options have been properly considered and there's no alternative
c) There is an urgent need to alleviate traffic safety concerns at Slane
d) The board accept the local concerns regarding the high level of commercial traffic on the approaches to Slane.

Based on the oral / written submissions ABP stated:
i) the board don't believe that "alternatives to a bypass have been adequately explored" and would have a detrimental effect on the rural character landscape etc
ii) the proposed bypass is only dealing with north-south traffic on the N2 and will not have an effect on east west traffic and is likely to attract additional commercial traffic onto the single carriageway portions of the N2
iii) wrt the configuration of the national road network in the region a bypass at Slane would undermine the existing investment in the existing strategic roads network and would undermine the environment and road safety of the existing N2
iv) the traffic data and analysis presented by the application were unconvincing regarding how much of the heavy vehicle traffic in Slane was local and how much was down to the fact that there's no toll in the area (encouraging through traffic).

So in a nutshell, they decided to decline permission and overrule the inspector because the applicant didn't fully consider the possibility of traffic management measures (i.e. heavy vehicle ban) and other alternatives to building a road.

D.L.R.

but a grossly over-spec 50km motorway to an unremarkable satellite town...
no problems there!

fuppets

L1011

All that's needed to send it back is to show that a few other routes are unworkable and that a heavy vehicle ban isn't possible (due to lack of alternate routes - there needs to be a signed, untolled, alternate route).

That said, if they need to do any redesign they may as well do an N51 bypass also...

boynesider

Time to put the bypass on the other side of the village straight through Mountcharles' land. Bet he'd love that!

dowlingm

Has higher enforcement been tried - tacho checks etc. to make Slane uninviting for truckies?

donkey balls

dowlingm wrote: »

Has higher enforcement been tried - tacho checks etc. to make Slane uninviting for truckies?

How would enforcement checks stop trucking companies from going through a particular village considering the road tax on a truck costs in excess €2000 they have a right like any other road user to be on the road,I think we need to get away from the thinking that HGV,s in general are dirty diesel eating machines when in fact they are probely maintained to a higher standard than your normal famly car.
And might I say the way the govt go on about the export market leading us out of our current predicament how the f**k do they think the goods get to the UK/Europe?eco friendly fairies delivering the products:rolleyes:.

JupiterKid

Very disappointing of ABP. I usually concur with their decisions but not this one. The existing N2 at Slane is very dangerous and must be replaced asap.

Irish and Proud

donkey balls wrote: »

How would enforcement checks stop trucking companies from going through a particular village considering the road tax on a truck costs in excess €2000 they have a right like any other road user to be on the road,I think we need to get away from the thinking that HGV,s in general are dirty diesel eating machines when in fact they are probely maintained to a higher standard than your normal famly car.
And might I say the way the govt go on about the export market leading us out of our current predicament how the f**k do they think the goods get to the UK/Europe?eco friendly fairies delivering the products:rolleyes:.

+1

...and if there is a HGV ban in Slane, how are the trucks from RoadStone supposed to access Drogheda or Duleek for example without traveling via totally unsuitable roads? One of ABP's arguments seems to be that the new road would be seen from Newgrange:

"a) The proposed development is within the "viewshed" of a UNESCO world heritage site"

- that echos the likes of UNESCO & Co. who seem to think the lives of local people are unimportant - especially when it doesn't fit their construction of Ireland. Typical foreign mentality that fails to grasp the concept of today's Irish culture and lifestyle - it wouldn't surprise me if they were looking out for a few leprechauns amid all the thatched cottages on their first visit here! :rolleyes: Back to ABP - another argument of theirs:

"iii) wrt the configuration of the national road network in the region a bypass at Slane would undermine the existing investment in the existing strategic roads network and would undermine the environment and road safety of the existing N2"

- there's a voice in my head repeatedly saying "it's to protect toll revenues"! :rolleyes:

- also, the N2 is a National Primary Route in case ABP didn't know - the 'N' actually stands for 'National Route'! The purpose of a National Road is to carry long distance traffic - and whether the N2 should be a National Route is surely a matter for the NRA (one of the main authorities backing the Slane Bypass).

With the above said, hasn't the state a constitutional obligation to look after its citizens - since the local people in general want the bypass, isn't the state answerable to its people rather than UNESCO or vested interests? All for democracy! :mad:

donkey balls

As someone who has drove the lenght and breath of the country as a professional driver before we had motorways built in this country the last thing a driver wants is to be on a crap road with no alternative.
But hey this is Ireland and the likes of driving through the Glenties in Donegal or to Belmullet is part of the job;) we have to put up with,Also there is other business in and around Slane that have to use the N2 what do ABP want them to do drive on a detour which will cost the company more on fuel/wear&tear on the HGV plus o/t for their staff.
This would lead to higher transport costs on everything we consume be it bread/milk to fuel costs not to mention extra pollution,There needs to be some form of a happy medium for all stake holders when it comes to road infrastructure.
This thing of HGV bans for the sake of it is utter bull me thinks the people in govt along with ABP don't live in the real world,Just take this scenario I'm doing the route planning for a number of vehicles just say starting from Dublin 1st drop is Drogheda 2nd is Navan.
Now why would I have the vehicle go to it's first delivery and then have it come back down the same road when it can be routed cross country into Navan saving time/ fuel etc which is = to €€€€€€€€€€ in savings.
If every HGV was to stop running just say for one week the whole country would more or less come to a stand still how do people think their refuse would be collected,Hospitals to get there oxygen for patients etc,companies to get their goods to the international markets aircraft to get the jet a1 fuel the list goes on.

JupiterKid

What is this "viewshed" nonsense? I was at Newgrange and Knowth a couple of years ago with some friends from abroad and from Newgrange part of the M1 Boyne cable stayed bridge could be seen. I don't recall ABP objecting to that bridge on the grounds of "viewshed."

The only real solution for Slane is a bypass - the N2 is utterly unsatisfactory, in fact it is very dangerous, the existing bridge is nigh on 400 years old and was never designed to take lorries and busses. It still amazes me that the bridge wasn't replaced decades ago like it should have been.

donkey balls

What if they built a bridge parralel to the old one finished in some form of brick work that the bridge would not stand out all metal&shinny while closing the old of to pedestrians.
This guy Salafia mentioned in some of the news article is he the solictor guy that was involved in the Tara dispute at the time of the construction of the M3?.

Irish and Proud

Just sent this to UNESCO (Europe) a moment ago...

To UNESCO in general,

I'm a resident from Co Meath in Ireland, so I think you might know where this message is going...

...yes, you guessed it, the Slane Bypass and its proximity to Newgrange Megalithic Tomb. Well for now you got your way with the ABP decision yesterday, but if you think we in Ireland are going to indefinitely tolerate high handed foreign interests who know nothing about Ireland and its culture, you have another thing coming. There are a lot of very annoyed locals now in the pretty village of Slane who have for decades put up with heavy traffic traveling through their streets (where else can it go - especially locally base traffic) and over an extremely dangerous bridge on a National Road (N2) - this has resulted in 22 deaths including a toddler in 2001 - but why would I bother mentioning deaths to you - sure they're only ordinary people and why would that matter. Regarding Newgrange itself, it has stood for 5000 years and has done so without you help - we Irish have gone to great lengths to preserve our heritage - in short, Newgrange is ours and who do you think you are to hijack one of our great National Monuments and especially to try and effectively cleanse us and our way of life from it's vicinity.

Shame on you!

JupiterKid

donkey balls wrote: »

What if they built a bridge parralel to the old one finished in some form of brick work that the bridge would not stand out all metal&shinny while closing the old of to pedestrians.
This guy Salafia mentioned in some of the news article is he the solictor guy that was involved in the Tara dispute at the time of the construction of the M3?.

Navan and Drogheda had their Boyne bridges on the N3 and N1 respectively replaced in the 1970s but Slane is much more problematic given the steep sided valley that the bridge sits within and the way that the bridge is at almost a right angle to the N2 approaches. The only real solution is a bypass for Slane.

dubhthach

JupiterKid wrote: »

What is this "viewshed" nonsense? I was at Newgrange and Knowth a couple of years ago with some friends from abroad and from Newgrange part of the M1 Boyne cable stayed bridge could be seen. I don't recall ABP objecting to that bridge on the grounds of "viewshed."

The only real solution for Slane is a bypass - the N2 is utterly unsatisfactory, in fact it is very dangerous, the existing bridge is nigh on 400 years old and was never designed to take lorries and busses. It still amazes me that the bridge wasn't replaced decades ago like it should have been.

Not only that but the Boyne Bridge and the M1 form the eastern Boundary of the buffer zone.

SeanW

There's only one word I can think of for this decision

>_<

Slane Resident

I've just finished reading all 124 pages of the Inspector's report into the bypass and I'm confused. He concludes the best of the possible routes was chosen, that it will have a positive effect on human life, no impact on flora and fauna, noise pollution in Bru an Boinne will be imperceptible, view from Newgrange unchanged, view from Knowth changed slightly but "the bridge, which would be simple in form, would be quite distant from Knowth and would appear as a compatible feature in a river valley landscape", it will not be visible from the rest of the core area, it won't lead to further developments because of the Local Area Plan, there are no significant archaeological concerns and he's satisfied that the archaeological investigation was of a high standard. Lifting the M1 toll, which he says is impossible anyway, won't have a significant impact on traffic safety, and a total HGV ban would put local businesses under severe pressure and divert the risks to other rural roads. He says due to the intolerable traffic situation, doing nothing is not an option.

So what am I missing?

antoobrien

Slane Resident wrote: »

I've just finished reading all 124 pages of the Inspector's report into the bypass and I'm confused. He concludes the best of the possible routes was chosen, that it will have a positive effect on human life, no impact on flora and fauna, noise pollution in Bru an Boinne will be imperceptible, view from Newgrange unchanged, view from Knowth changed slightly but "the bridge, which would be simple in form, would be quite distant from Knowth and would appear as a compatible feature in a river valley landscape", it will not be visible from the rest of the core area, it won't lead to further developments because of the Local Area Plan, there are no significant archaeological concerns and he's satisfied that the archaeological investigation was of a high standard. Lifting the M1 toll, which he says is impossible anyway, won't have a significant impact on traffic safety, and a total HGV ban would put local businesses under severe pressure and divert the risks to other rural roads. He says due to the intolerable traffic situation, doing nothing is not an option.

So what am I missing?

I suggest you read the board's report to see exactly where they disagreed with the inspector. They found that the alternatives (i.e. traffic management) were not considered properly.

I have just read the decision doc, might get to the others over the weekend, but is there any mention of the traffic surveys etc in the inspectors report?

spacetweek

antoobrien wrote: »

I suggest you read the board's report to see exactly where they disagreed with the inspector. They found that the alternatives (i.e. traffic management) were not considered properly.

I have just read the decision doc, might get to the others over the weekend, but is there any mention of the traffic surveys etc in the inspectors report?

Is it a simple case of the inspector issuing more detail on the traffic management possiblilities (i.e. the lack of them?)
In which case the application could just be resubmitted, all else unchanged?

Can ABP decisions be appealed?

Slane Resident

the Inspector suggested that the applicant " make the following alterations to the scheme and submit the following further information:

1. You are required to carry out comprehensive origin/destination surveys to determine the patterns of traffic movements in the M1/M2/N2 road corridors, with particular regard to the origins and destinations of heavy goods vehicles, and to submit the results to an Bord Pleanála. These surveys shall comprise the following:

(a) A comprehensive roadside origin / destination survey. This shall take place over at least two, not necessarily consecutive, working days, shall cover the period from 7.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. on each day of the survey and shall be implemented by means of interviews with a sample of drivers. The survey locations shall include the N2 north of Ardee, the R169 west of Junction 12, the N2 north of Slane, the N2 south of the junction of the R150, the N51 west of Slane and the R153 west of Kentstown. The information to be collected shall include origins, destinations, intermediate calling points (if relevant), purpose of journey and vehicle type. The results shall be presented on the basis of zones based on towns, villages and road corridor segments. Advance notice of the survey shall be given only to the extent necessary to ensure compliance with accepted standards of safety for road users and survey personnel and regard shall be had to any advice or directions received following consultation with An Garda Síochána.

(b) A survey of major traffic generating enterprises in the Slane area to include all significant industrial, extractive and commercial enterprises in Slane, within 10 km along the N2 road to the north and south of Slane and within 5 km along the N51 road to the east and west of Slane. This survey shall include details of all HGV movements over a period of one week outside the months of June, July and August and outside other holiday periods and shall as far as possible include the origins and destinations of all journeys made. "

Instead of requesting this further information, the Board just turned down the application and according to Minister Varadkar's interview this morning, if the further information is submitted it has to be put all the way through the planning process again, with possibly another decade of delays. How many more people will be killed and injured in that decade?

Slane Resident

Spacetweek, ABP decisions can't be appealed but Senator Thomas Byrne is calling for a judicial review, which is allowed for if it is felt that the Board has gone outside its remit. Minister Varadkar didn't seem to hold out much hope of that proceeding though, and stated in an interview today that it was "certain" that if permission was granted the opponents would insist on a judicial review which would tie it up for years in the courts. So if you have money you can demand a judicial review, because you don't want your view marginally affected, but if you're the government or ordinary citizens who can't afford to, you don't. Some democracy.

spacetweek

Slane Resident wrote: »

Instead of requesting this further information, the Board just turned down the application and according to Minister Varadkar's interview this morning, if the further information is submitted it has to be put all the way through the planning process again, with possibly another decade of delays.

There should be a way of skipping the queue when you're resubmitting a previously submitted application, on the grounds that you've been made wait so long already.

L1011

donkey balls wrote: »

What if they built a bridge parralel to the old one finished in some form of brick work that the bridge would not stand out all metal&shinny while closing the old of to pedestrians.

Traffic would still need to negotiate two 90 degree bends and a hill.

Its generally those that have caused the accidents, NOT the bridge.

Carawaystick

donkey balls wrote: »

This thing of HGV bans for the sake of it is utter bull me thinks the people in govt along with ABP don't live in the real world,Just take this scenario I'm doing the route planning for a number of vehicles just say starting from Dublin 1st drop is Drogheda 2nd is Navan.
Now why would I have the vehicle go to it's first delivery and then have it come back down the same road when it can be routed cross country into Navan saving time/ fuel etc which is = to €€€€€€€€€€ in savings.

If the N2 had the hgv ban, the N51 route would allow a truck go from Drogheda to Navan.

The route is for hgv's to get from Ashbourne to Ardee. How much traffic is generated on this route?

For Dublin to Ardee and North, the M1/N33 serves this. I'd build a Kilcock/Loughrea style relief road on the N51 north of Slane and make it a 7.5tonne limit south of this relief road and a 3 tonne limit from the cross roads in Slane to the junction at the top of the south bank of the Boyne.

I'd de-trunk the N2 from Ardee south also.

consideration could be given to reducing the limit on the n2 to 80 from Ardee to Ashbourne and negotiating discounts with the m1 company for the extra traffic, either with a barrier free tolling sensor at Ardee to give N2 traffic discounts, N2 hgv discounts.

Regarding the alternative route, look at the distance 5axle hgvs have to travel around the m50 to get from Dublin port to say Vincents Hospital.

Slane Resident

Carawaystick wrote: »

The route is for hgv's to get from Ashbourne to Ardee. How much traffic is generated on this route?

.

1,260 HGVs which are travelling to local points not served by the M1, according to an NRA study.

antoobrien

Slane Resident wrote: »

the Inspector suggested that the applicant " make the following alterations to the scheme and submit the following further information:

1. You are required to carry out comprehensive origin/destination surveys to determine the patterns of traffic movements in the M1/M2/N2 road corridors, with particular regard to the origins and destinations of heavy goods vehicles, and to submit the results to an Bord Pleanála. These surveys shall comprise the following:

(a) A comprehensive roadside origin / destination survey. This shall take place over at least two, not necessarily consecutive, working days, shall cover the period from 7.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. on each day of the survey and shall be implemented by means of interviews with a sample of drivers. The survey locations shall include the N2 north of Ardee, the R169 west of Junction 12, the N2 north of Slane, the N2 south of the junction of the R150, the N51 west of Slane and the R153 west of Kentstown. The information to be collected shall include origins, destinations, intermediate calling points (if relevant), purpose of journey and vehicle type. The results shall be presented on the basis of zones based on towns, villages and road corridor segments. Advance notice of the survey shall be given only to the extent necessary to ensure compliance with accepted standards of safety for road users and survey personnel and regard shall be had to any advice or directions received following consultation with An Garda Síochána.

(b) A survey of major traffic generating enterprises in the Slane area to include all significant industrial, extractive and commercial enterprises in Slane, within 10 km along the N2 road to the north and south of Slane and within 5 km along the N51 road to the east and west of Slane. This survey shall include details of all HGV movements over a period of one week outside the months of June, July and August and outside other holiday periods and shall as far as possible include the origins and destinations of all journeys made. "

Instead of requesting this further information, the Board just turned down the application and according to Minister Varadkar's interview this morning, if the further information is submitted it has to be put all the way through the planning process again, with possibly another decade of delays. How many more people will be killed and injured in that decade?

I know the ABP inspector suggested these but a two day origin / destination study & 1 week of a traffic survey (presumably the suggested time is so as not to inflate the figures with summertime peaks) doesn't strike me as being anywhere near sufficient to prove the case (ABP doesn't appear to believe whatever was submitted either).

There's also the problem that ABP pointed out, the suggested route doesn't cater for significant volume of east west traffic going through Slane. I know that's not your primary concern - the safety of the bridge is, but it's something that probably needs to be considered.

tuathal

There is a good letter in the Irish Times today -

"An important question remains. Why won’t the NRA and Meath Co Council implement a heavy goods vehicle ban to address the genuine and important safety concerns of local residents? After all, the distance between Dublin Port and Ardee is 73km via the M1 and 74km via the N2.

munchkin_utd

tuathal wrote: »

There is a good letter in the Irish Times today -

"An important question remains. Why won’t the NRA and Meath Co Council implement a heavy goods vehicle ban to address the genuine and important safety concerns of local residents? After all, the distance between Dublin Port and Ardee is 73km via the M1 and 74km via the N2.

its a simple reason why theres no traction on a truck ban.

If the trucks are removed, then the danger is removed.
If the danger is removed then the reason to have the by pass is removed.
And then there's no chance of the bypass ever being built in the short or medium future if ever, not to mention theres no reason really to have the N2 as a primary route either (meaning then it'd be a regional road costing meath council money)

so now the question is, how many lives will it take to be lost either force a bypass ahead OR a ban on trucks ?
Because essentially its people's lives are being gambled by the locals and the council in the hope that a bypass gets through on the basis of previous lives lost.

Irish and Proud

tuathal wrote: »

There is a good letter in the Irish Times today -

"An important question remains. Why won’t the NRA and Meath Co Council implement a heavy goods vehicle ban to address the genuine and important safety concerns of local residents? After all, the distance between Dublin Port and Ardee is 73km via the M1 and 74km via the N2.

The poster's address is:

Dr JARLATH MOLLOY,
Rue Fabre,
Montreal,
Quebec,
Canada.

Easy for a person to make suggestions when he/she doesn't have to live with the problem and especially when he/she doesn't even live in the country. According to this article, when the bridge was closed (2 weeks) for repairs, many trucks simply diverted to the small country roads causing mayhem for the local communities there and I'd know from experience because I live on a country road myself - the roads in my area were ruined during the building frenzy with all the trucks and I seriously felt a new road was needed then - thankfully, I now enjoy the fact that we have regained some of our green ditches. With the above in mind, the argument that a HGV ban would be sufficient is pure fantasy IMO. The only viable alternative to a bypass would be to implement shadow tolls for trucks on the M1 which would be paid for by the Government in line with the HGV traffic levels - as an ordinary motorist though, I'd be a bit peeved as I'd still be paying tolls while other users get a free ride (complement of the taxpayer!) - I don't think that would be fair. However, I did see a render of the proposed bridge for Slane on RTE News and I don't think it's satisfactory as it seems unsympathetic to the character of Slane - why can't a stone clad round arched viaduct be used instead - might actually add to the current setting there - the M1 viaduct looks quite elegant from some viewpoints along the river and it looks really well at night.

Regards!

macgreine

I doubt if many people will be killed at Slane at least any more than in other places. The truth is that no one has been killed there since traffic calming measures were introduced in 2001. Its immoral to mis-use one's own dead to build a road that we cannot afford.
Go back to the drawing board please Slane and start by the acceptance of sustainability.