[Article] Protestors aim to halt work on M50 again!

thejollyrodger · 17-08-2004 06:49AM #1

17/08/04
After two years and a €20m bill, work resumes on motorway - but not for long, warn protesters

By Senan Hogan
http://www.irishexaminer.com/

WORK finally resumed yesterday morning on the remaining section of Dublin’s M50 motorway, but conservationists have warned they will try to halt the project again.

After two years and a €20m bill, work resumes on motorway - but not for long, warn protesters

By Senan Hogan
WORK finally resumed yesterday morning on the remaining section of Dublin’s M50 motorway, but conservationists have warned they will try to halt the project again.

The route, which passes through the ruined walls of Carrickmines Castle, has been delayed by a two-year campaign of sit-in protests and legal battles by the local ‘Carrickminders’ group.

But workmen and officials from Dun Laoghaire Rathdown Co. Council re-entered the South Dublin site at 8.30am yesterday and began work under strict archaeological supervision.

Environment Minister Martin Cullen gave the official go-ahead for the project last week under the specific terms of the new National Monuments (Amendment) Act, 2004.

This allows for the removal and partial destruction of some of the remains of the medieval castle site by the council.

However, the Carrickminders group, which wants the entire site preserved, served notice yesterday on the local authority, warning that the National Monuments (Amendment) Act is unconstitutional and therefore any resumption of work is illegal.

Carrickminders’ spokesman Vincent Salafia said yesterday: “We are considering getting an interlocutory injunction in the High Court as early as tomorrow morning to stop the current work.”

Mr Salafia, who is not allowed to enter the work site, added: “We want the council to respond to specific written queries on the construction work or else we will begin legal proceedings.”

The council says the delays have added €20m to the cost of the South Eastern Motorway project, which will bring its final estimated cost to €596m. The council’s director of transportation Eamonn O’Hare said: “We are satisfied that we are acting within the law and barring any court injunctions, we hope to have the project completed by August 2005.”

Speaking from the site, he added: “We believe we are fully complying with the directions of the courts and the provisions of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act.”

A small number of protesters attended the site yesterday as work progressed, but they did not attempt to halt any of the work. The 9km project, which was originally due to open in October, will complete Dublin’s M50 motorway bypass linking the M11 to the M1.

thejollyrodger · 17-08-2004 06:51AM

This is a disgrace!! I cant belive those nuts want to stop this motorway being completed. If it was me, I would raise the place to the ground. E20million overruns, just because some jobless people dont want progress

MrPudding · 17-08-2004 07:09AM

I think nuts may be a bit strong.....but I am open to correction.

MrP

thejollyrodger · 17-08-2004 07:43AM

can we take a poll on that with the people in the traffic jams?

BrianD · 17-08-2004 09:08AM

This is a disgrace!! I cant belive those nuts want to stop this motorway being completed. If it was me, I would raise the place to the ground. E20million overruns, just because some jobless people dont want progress

Fair play to them I say and long may this type of protest continue. We don't need progress for the sake of it especially if leads to the destruction of our heritage. "We" were happy to let the corruption in Carrickmines (Jackson Way etc) go by until it got hauled up in the tribunals. We happy to allow massive cost over runs go by as the norm. Yet when somebody stands up to protect our heritage we call them a bunch of nuts?????

This situation could have easily been resolved years ago (at this stage) by bridging the site, a relocation of the roundabout or by the deletion of this unnecessary junction. Serious questions have to be asked why there are so many junctions on this section of m-way. Who benefits? The users of a national primary route or property developers who want the M50 to become a suburban road? There is an extra cost involved in preserving the ruins but sure won't everybody do nicely out of it?

sliabh · 17-08-2004 09:41AM

In a country that has been fairly densely inhabited for thousands of years you will have trouble building anything of scale without running into something historical, particularly around cities. The problem here is finding the balance between the "we must preserve all our heritage" view and "you can't stand in the way of progress".

Which is why there were some minor changes proposed to the road design to reduce the impact on the site. I know people feel that these should be greater, but at this late stage fo the project you have to go with what is realistic.

People have asked why was a bridge or re-routing not built into the M50 designs originally and the reason is that while the site was known about years ago no one really realised how large it was until the excavations began.

As for the current protests, I think that the view is the recent changes to teh heritage act mean a legal challenge is pretty much sure to fail. So the construction will go on.

Gillo · 17-08-2004 12:41PM

Ok, maybe I am missing the point, but it's not the castle that is been knocked down it's a wall, which from what I is not (physically) connected to the castle and is burried on one side anyway.

I know it's old but wouldn't exactly call it heritage.

BrianD · 17-08-2004 01:36PM

Well gillo it is a part of our heritage.

The new act is a sham designed to pander to toll road builders and property developers. Good article in the Irish Times about it written about the act by one of the Carrickminders.

I see no reason why we can't have both the m-way and the ruins preserved without the controversy. The money and time wasted to protect developers would have paid for the work and we could already be driving on the M50.

Prosta · 17-08-2004 02:20PM

I was gonna post a rant about pointless protests here and about the M3 at Tara but figured I should look at whats going on 1st.

Looks like massive damage to the site when the alternative suggested has feck all impact. Whats with all the junctions?

I still think the Tara protests are nonsense. The M3 is miles away from the hill of Tara. So maybe a few ring forts are destroyed. So what - the place is minging with them anyway

BrianD · 17-08-2004 03:58PM

The number of junctions on this stretch is unusual. In my view, these are there only to accomodate various residential and commercial developments and really defeat the purpose of the M50 C-ring. If you look at the existing M50 - of 9 junctions built 6 intersect with other primary routes and are relatively evenly spaced. Now we have 3 junctions relatively close together serving largely residential areas. Very handy for somebody!

Pataman · 17-08-2004 04:08PM

BrianD wrote:

The number of junctions on this stretch is unusual. In my view, these are there only to accomodate various residential and commercial developments and really defeat the purpose of the M50 C-ring. If you look at the existing M50 - of 9 junctions built 6 intersect with other primary routes and are relatively evenly spaced. Now we have 3 junctions relatively close together serving largely residential areas. Very handy for somebody!

Yes for the thousands of people that will use it !

Victor · 17-08-2004 04:31PM

Pataman wrote:

Yes for the thousands of people that will use it !

And people before tribunals that may or may not own the adjacent land.

BrianD · 17-08-2004 06:16PM

It's a national primary not a commuter route. The sooner they toll the whole route the better with higher tolls for those going shorter distances.

thejollyrodger · 17-08-2004 06:57PM

Now we have 3 junctions relatively close together serving largely residential areas. Very handy for somebody!

Sounds like a racket to me!! The M-50 is going to be obselete even before its finished. They have to upgrade all those junctions to (new red cow) flyovers and widen the lanes to at least 4 or 5 each way. Otherwise it's back to the drawing board and build a further C ring to get all the traffic out of dublin

As for the M3, they better get their thinking caps on for that one. Proper planning with the best route selected is a urgent necessity. Otherwise construction will begin and there will be more homeless people hanging out of the trees leading to more hold ups in the court and legal action

BrianD · 18-08-2004 09:24AM

homeless people hanging out of the trees

There are no trees at Carrickmines nor is there anything to suggest that the protestors are homeless. Are you afraid of dissent? Prefer to fall in line as the powers that be dictate to you?

Flukey · 18-08-2004 11:12PM

A lot of these people are far from what is being depicted in this thread and beyond. They are not all homeless, jobless etc. They wouldn't be holding up the work if the work had been properly planned in the first instance. The planners should have known about Carrickmines if they were doing their research properly. Even if they did get it wrong, it still could have been finished now if they had adjusted the route in the beginning instead of trying to fight the objectors in the court. That is costing a lot more money that between legal fees, delays and the inflationary costs of doing the road, than if they had put in the extra work and money to have changed the route when they first encountered the problem. The next time they are building a road, they should do more research and get as much of the route sorted out beforehand and if there are subsequent problems to be able to deal with them quickly and adjust the route if necessary. The planners, the government and the council are far more to blame for the delays than the people making the objections.

Victor · 19-08-2004 12:15AM

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/topstories/3825310?view=Eircomnet

Court move today to stop work on M50 motorway
From:ireland.com
Wednesday, 18th August, 2004

The legality of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act, introduced only a month ago to facilitate completion of the M50 at Carrickmines Castle, is to be challenged in the High Court.

Mr Justice Peart yesterday granted Mr Dominic Dunne leave to seek injunctions this afternoon restraining motorway development works, which resumed on Monday, until the constitutionality of the new legislation is determined by the court.

He told Mr Coleman FitzGerald SC, for Mr Dunne, of Benburb Street, Dublin, that short notice of Mr Dunne's intentions could be served on the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council.

Mr FitzGerald told the court the Act would be challenged as invalid on constitutional grounds and with regard to provisions of European Union law, in particular EU directives in respect of environmental impact assessment.

He said that on Monday diggers and archaeologists had started to remove walls and artefacts and unless they were restrained now by court order from demolishing, disfiguring, defacing or altering medieval archaeological remains until determination of the constitutional challenge, there would be nothing left to protect.

Mr FitzGerald said Section 8 of the Act, dealing in most express terms with the M50 at Carrickmines, purported to give the Minister a virtually unfettered power or discretion in deciding whether to issue directions dealing with any national monument affected by the completion of the South Eastern Route (M50). He said the legislature had delegated to the Minister (the Executive) its powers and functions to make law to an excessive extent and one prohibited by the Constitution of Ireland.

Mr FitzGerald said Section 8 was further invalid having regard to the provisions of the Constitution to protect the national assets and archaeological, historic and cultural heritage of the State which acted as a key for the people of Ireland in understanding their own history and development.

He said the section wholly failed to comply with the Constitution in purporting to allow the Minister to give directions to demolish or remove a national monument and further purported to give Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council the legal entitlement to act on foot of the Minister's directions.

Mr FitzGerald said Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, in earlier proceedings relating to Carrickmines Castle, had given an undertaking in the High Court not to carry out further development work, but now claimed the 2004 Act had superseded issues in any earlier proceedings.

Mr Dunne, in an affidavit, said demolition works currently being carried out by Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown council were clearly not works to preserve, protect or safeguard the national monument or to safeguard the national assets, archaeological, historical and cultural heritage of the State.

He said the works were being carried out at great speed and, unless legally restrained, the vast bulk of the Carrickmines monument would have been demolished, removed or otherwise interfered with over the next several days or weeks.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/0818/carrickmines.html

Affidavits sought over Carrickmines site
18 August 2004 16:20

A High Court judge has said it would be undesirable to see a race between the diggers and the courts over the Carrickmines Castle site.

Mr Justice Michael Peart has requested affidavits from Dún Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council and conservationists at the site giving details of the work that has taken place there since Monday.

Conservationists have sought an injunction stopping the work as soon as possible.

They are challenging the constitutionality of the legislation passed last month allowing the motorway to go ahead despite the presence of the historic monument.

Conservationists claim that work being carried out by the county council since Monday is illegal and they maintain a large bulk of the monument could be demolished or removed by next week.

Counsel for Dún Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council said the work that had been taking place did not involve any demolition but mainly archaeological excavation which had been undertaken in an orderly fashion.

Both sides will present their affidavits tomorrow morning.

A full hearing of the constitutionality of the legislation allowing the motorway to go ahead is expected to take place next week.

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/3826215?view=Eircomnet

Court to hear application to halt M50 work
From:ireland.com
Wednesday, 18th August, 2004

Conservationists will this morning lodge an application in the High Court for an interlocutory injunction to stop construction of the South Eastern Motorway over the ruins of Carrickmines Castle.

Yesterday Justice Michael Peart heard that new legislation allowing work to resume at the South Dublin site on Monday was "unconstitutional" and that a national monument "was being unlawfully destroyed as we speak".

The application was made this afternoon on behalf of Mr Dominic Dunne of Collins Square, Benburb Street, Dublin.

Mr Dunne is one of the original litigants that stopped work on the site last January after courts found it was unconstitutional.

Mr Colman Fitzgerald SC said that "excessive powers" were given to Environment Minister Martin Cullen under the new National Monuments Amendment Act 2004 and that this breached Article 15(2) of the Constitution.

The National Monuments Amendment Act, enacted in July, followed another successful legal challenge by the 'Carrickminders' conservation group last January.

The Act made specific reference to the M50 project and allowed Minister Cullen to make an order allowing for partial destruction of the Carrickmines site in order for construction work to continue.

Mr Fitzgerald said the resumption of work on the site also breached Article 5 of the Constitution which stated that the State has a duty to protect the national heritage of the people of Ireland.

Mr Justice Peart said that he had "limited knowledge" of the 18-month saga of sit-in protests and legal battles in relation to the issue.

He added: "What I know is what I have read in the morning's papers. But I know that the work is being carried out under the supervision of archaeologists."

The judge ordered Mr Fitzgerald to serve notice of his application to the respondents; Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council and the Chief State Solicitors Office tonight.

He said the respondents should be given enough time to submit affidavits on their own behalf. He fixed the hearing for 2pm today in the High Court.

Flukey · 19-08-2004 10:32PM

More needless delays! :rolleyes: Why do they call them planners, if they can't plan? :rolleyes:

Lennoxschips · 20-08-2004 12:16AM

There are plenty of good planners working for the councils, the problem is that the politicians never listen to them. Politicians aren't interested in planning, they are only interested in what can be done in the next five years.

sliabh · 20-08-2004 09:18AM

Flukey wrote:

More needless delays! :rolleyes: Why do they call them planners, if they can't plan? :rolleyes:

No one (not even the bone diggers) realised the site at Carrickmines was as extensive as it turned out to be. You can't plan for what you don't know.

And as Lennoxschips says, the planners are not to blame. They are professionals and have been doing this for years. But the implementation of their plans are at the whim of politicians who have very different agendas. Remember that the next time you hear about some gobsh*te politician engaged in a populist rant against "unelected bureaucrats".

I'd rather trust a technocrat who has studied their subject in college and has years of experience than some farmer/publican/soliciter hunting a few more votes.

Victor · 20-08-2004 12:09PM

sliabh wrote:

You can't plan for what you don't know.

Perhaps not, but you can make allowances for unknowns. The larger and more sophisticated the project, the larger the unknowns.

sliabh wrote:

And as Lennoxschips says, the planners are not to blame.

Yes and no. Someone at the "top" needs to take responsibility,w hcich they aren't. "Top" reaches from the council engineers and planners involved, up the the two ministers.

It's the gobsh*te overly optimistic view that has been imported from the USA over the last ten years of having no contigency and no in-built redundancy. If even the smallest thing goes wrong, everything goes wrong.

fjon · 20-08-2004 02:20PM

And here we go, from the Indo today. By now that August 2005 date is starting to look a bit optimistic:

Court suspends works at motorway castle site

WORK on the completion of the M50 motorway has been suspended for a week to allow the High Court hear a constitutional objection to its construction.

Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council yesterday undertook not to carry out any works, except those needed to preserve archaeological remains at the Carrickmines Castle site, until next Thursday at 11am.

Earlier, the High Court heard a court injunction restraining development at the site will cost taxpayers another €350,000 a week.

Works have been suspended until conservationist Dominic Dunne takes a constitutional challenge to the new National Monuments (Amendment) Act, which was drawn up to permit completion of the motorway. The High Court hearing is set for next Thursday and Friday.

Last night, the Green Party insisted any delays arising from the High Court decision can be laid at the door of Environment Minister Martin Cullen, who "rammed" the Act through the Dail before summer recess.

The Greens' Ciaran Cuffe said the bill could be used as a Trojan Horse to threaten other National Monuments. While the party wants to see the M50 completed, Mr Cuffe said changes could safeguard more of the castle and allow the road to open as soon as possible.

Rory O'Sullivan, project resident engineer on the south-eastern motorway, yesterday told Mr Justice Michael Peart in an affidavit on behalf of Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council that about €12.7m had been spent to date on archaeology for the motorway.

A huge proportion of this - €9.6m - had been spent on the Carrickmines site alone. The motorway was to open this October, but this had been extended to August 2005.

Mr O'Sullivan said the absence of the motorway had a major negative impact on quality of life of communities in Dublin, Ballinteer, Sandyford and Kilmacud. Its absence also affected business at Sandyford and Stillorgan industrial estates, the airport and the city region in general. Mr O'Sullivan's affidavit was one of two submitted to the court yesterday, challenging claims by Mr Dunne that mechanical diggers were demolishing the ancient remains.

Archaeologist Gary Conboy told the court in the second affidavit that Mr Cullen issued directions to the County Council under Section 8 of the new National Monuments (Amendment) Act, drawn up to permit completion of the motorway.

Mr Dunne is challenging the Act's constitutionality.

Mr Conboy said archaeological digs commenced on Monday last to excavate, photograph and record all archaeological features. He rejected Mr Dunne's claim that mechanical diggers were involved in the removal of parts of the archaelogical remains and artefacts on site.

He said the approach being adopted envisaged the resolution of some features by preservation in situ and some by excavation and recording.

Flukey · 20-08-2004 04:21PM

Even if they didn't know the extent of it, it was known the castle was there, but the plans were still to go straight through it. Even then, once the problems were encountered, it would have worked out cheaper to re-route it, rather than holding it up for several years.

sliabh · 21-08-2004 05:05PM

Victor wrote:

It's the gobsh*te overly optimistic view that has been imported from the USA over the last ten years of having no contigency and no in-built redundancy. If even the smallest thing goes wrong, everything goes wrong.

Àctually things have become better planned and organised in recent years. That is one of the reasons for projects taking longer. Considerably more extensive groundwork is required before the first concrete is poured.

And much of that has been driven from the EU. Do you remember Enviromental Impact Assessments being required for projects 15-20 years ago?

GerardKeating · 21-08-2004 06:17PM

Flukey wrote:

Even if they didn't know the extent of it, it was known the castle was there, but the plans were still to go straight through it. Even then, once the problems were encountered, it would have worked out cheaper to re-route it, rather than holding it up for several years.

Just wondering, had anyone actually heard of this so called "important" castle before the carrickminders loonies started protesting.

It was lost for 500 years, not all castles ruins are important.

Victor · 21-08-2004 09:37PM

GerardKeating wrote:

Just wondering, had anyone actually heard of this so called "important" castle before the carrickminders loonies started protesting. It was lost for 500 years, not all castles ruins are important.

Well, actually DL-R CoCO did know about it, because there was a report done on it in 1986 and it was a protected structure in their development plan.

Flukey · 21-08-2004 11:34PM

What does it matter if it was heard of or not, although it was? Most things uncovered in these situations aren't known about until they are dug up. There could be a lot more up around the Hill of Tara. We have the situation in Waterford. These roads can be built without destroying our heritage. A little more carefully researched planning, working with interested parties and a lot of these holdups could be avoided or reduced.

chewy · 21-08-2004 11:39PM

the road that passes by is castle view???

and all the smaller older roads somehow veered around it before it was dug up

Flukey · 22-08-2004 10:26PM

Well we have to deal from the position we now find ourselves in. A completed M50 and a preserved site can live together. The two groups on either side need to find a way to do that, not that that will be easy. :rolleyes: This should have all been settled a long time ago and then we'd now have our finished M50 with our heritage still intact.

Tommy Vercetti · 24-08-2004 07:27PM

BrianD wrote:

Well gillo it is a part of our heritage.

The new act is a sham designed to pander to toll road builders and property developers. Good article in the Irish Times about it written about the act by one of the Carrickminders.

I see no reason why we can't have both the m-way and the ruins preserved without the controversy. The money and time wasted to protect developers would have paid for the work and we could already be driving on the M50.

I agree with you 100%, and that's as an over-taxed, congested motorist.

[Article] Protestors aim to halt work on M50 again!

Comments