The Tara Bypass – what they won’t tell you
- This topic has 263 replies, 42 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
Sue, maybe your Berties daughter in disguise , your logic is fundamentally flawed .
@Sue wrote:
If they DO find a Wood Quay or a Newgrange on the M3 route, we would NOT simply say let’s drive through it. This is the sort of dishonest argument we have to cope with all the time from eco lulus, as Bertie might call them. Set up a straw man, knock it down, cheer. If they DO find a Newgrange on the M3 route, I will (a) eat my hat and (b) completely and totally agree that the M3 should be rerouted.
However, they haven’t and they won’t find Newgrange or Wood Quay on this route. All they will find is a “henge” of no significance, and the bones of a big dead dog. Therefore, all the comparisons between Newgrange and the M3 are complete and utter nonsense. Don’t waste your time making any more of them, Letterfrack person.
Stick to the argument, stick to the route, on with the road!How do you know they wont find anything of major significance on the current route? As I pointed out in my post the experts have been wrong before (documented fact) regarding what lies beneth our hills and mounds, so there is a chance they are wrong once again. So unless your some kind of walking human geophysic-sonar device, which given your babbling posts you may well be you cant say that they wont find anything .
Evidently your okay with the destruction of a National monument as in the case of the Lismullin site discovered on the M3 route.
The biggest flaw in your argument is your admission that if you we do find something you will agree to re-routing. What if theres nowhere to turn/reroute to at the point, we may have to retrace our steps a considerable distance to find an alternate route. Millions will and have been wasted up to that point. Its a well known circumvention of planning rules to build first worry about the legality afterwards, trust me I know this ploy works and so do you thats why your a proponent of it.
Theres nothing dishonest about my argument, although given your a supporter of Berties actions you probably have a different definition of the word honesty as I do, and I will take being referred to as an eco lulu as a complement , its better than just being a plain lulu like yourself.
@mickletterfrack wrote:
Theres nothing dishonest about my argument, although given your a supporter of Berties actions you probably have a different definition of the word honesty as I do, and I will take being referred to as an eco lulu as a complement , its better than just being a plain lulu like yourself.
I agree – it is better to be an eco lulu than to be a lulu by default.
In any event the principle of requiring a high level of environmental protection has already been adopted by Europe so to refer to those in pursuit of seeing it implemented as ‘eco lulus’ is the same as rejecting European Law and branding those who created the EIA and SEA Directives as eco lulus. So take it up with them!
Also, the reference is made in ignorance of our (Ireland’s) legal obligation to comply with European Law which as stated above requires that a high level of environmental protection be provided. Clearly this is not happening when a Ministerial Order is signed off to “preserve by record” let’s call it what it is (destroy by document) a National Monument WITHOUT first carrying out an EIA on its proposed destruction and without considering the impact removing 75% of the monument would have on the remainder of the National Monument which lies on private land – save for a scant request in the Ministerial Order that the names and addresses of the adjoining land owners be provided to the department.
The strategy of the NRA has been obviously to present a facade of environmental/archaeological/cultural consideration while the agenda has never gear shifted away from forging ahead with the road NO MATTER WHAT. There have been dozens of archaeological sites discovered – and only one (a meagre concession) considered to be of National importance -NRA proposed logic: “Hey guys, let’s give this one NATIONAL MONUMENT STATUS to show what good work we’re doing – then we’ll arrange for it to be smashed up and we can carry on with laying the aggregate for our road construction – we won’t even consider what the effect of smashing up the monument will be (as is required by EU Law via EIA Directive upon encountering a new archaeological find which was not taken into account in the original EIA for the road project – it could not have been as it was undiscovered at that time – it is precisely this scenario which demands an additional EIA at the very least to show by paper trail that the environmental impact of its destruction had been considered in accordance with EU requirements). Have you got this yet Sue. It’s an EU legal requirement and we as a European Member State are obliged to comply – if we do not – we can be compelled to comply ultimately by fining – So now you should be thinking shouldn’t my tax payers money be spent doing the appropriate EIA’s for this project rather than throwing it down the drain on daily fines imposed by Europe for failure to comply with EU Law.
The worst part of this whole saga is that the NRA have duped the likes of Sue into accepting and believing without question that ‘eco lulus are holding up the road’ – that is the real tragedy – the selfishness of individuals in their desire to spin their wheels on a journey has become so compelling that it blinds them from the ultimate legal duty to follow due process (EIA) or pay the penalty.
Is this the Ireland our forefathers fought and died for!
Speaking as a complete laY person on this… but was there no Geo-Survey complied on the whole proposed route prior to commencement of development… paired with archaeological assessment on any anomolies that may have shown up????
This ad hoc, haphazard way of ‘sure, we’ll deal with it as it occurs’ is an afront to proper planning of any example of development…
Tara ruins must be preserved, says report
http://www.eveningecho.ie/news/bstory.asp?j=188196080&p=y88y9666x&n=18819668921/08/2007 – 2:27:43 PM
Newly discovered 2000-year-old ruins at the ancient Hill of Tara must be fully preserved because of their unique size and character, a US academic today said.
State archaeologists began excavation work on the prehistoric Lismullen structure earlier this month claiming it was under threat from adverse weather.
But Dr Ronald Hicks of Ball State University, Indiana, argues it is part of a larger ancient ritual complex and must be preserved in situ.
Controversy has surrounded the site since the ruins were uncovered by workers during construction work on the controversial M3 motorway last April.
TaraWatch, which is demanding the site be preserved, has called on the Government to halt excavation until An Bord Pleanála rulesif a fresh planning application for the road project is needed in light of the find.
“This independent reportproves the national monument is much more significant and substantial than the National Roads Authority have reported,†campaigner Vincent Salafia said.
“In light of this report, the minister should halt the demolition works until An Bord Pleanála concludes its current deliberative process.â€
Dr Hicks previously endorsed the nomination of Tara to the World Monuments Fund Listand issued an earlier report about the area’s archaeological significance.
In this latest report, he argues Lismullen is comparable to ceremonial enclosures found at Tara and other royal sites in Ireland, but is twice as large as any other.
He added the structure was part of a larger complex.
The site’s discovery came just a day after the then Minister for Transport Martin Cullen turned the sod on the €850m road project.
The semicircular enclosure, which lies across the northbound lane of the proposed motorway, is 80 metres in diameter and dates from between 380BC and 520BC.
It is thought to have been some kind of ceremonial site.
The discovery was granted National Monument status and all works were halted at the site.
But in one of his final acts of office, former Minister for the Environment Dick Roche used the National Monuments Act 2004 and signed an order of preservation by record, meaning the prehistoric henge would be photographed, sketched and measured before being razed to make way for the motorway.
Mr Gormley maintains he does not have the authority to revoke his predecessor’s decision without a material change in circumstance.
TaraWatch has sent a solicitor’s letter to Mr Gormley demanding the excavation work be stopped, to which it claims no reply has been received.
It argues the 2004 National Monuments Act is contrary to EU law because it did not require a new environmental impact assessment following the Lismullen discovery.
An Bord Pleanála is currently reviewing this matter and a decision is expected within weeks.
If the board rules the road scheme is now different to the one approved in September 2003, it could require a fresh planning application to be lodged, which would lead to huge delays in delivering the motorway.
“The board is deciding whether demolition of Lismullen is a material change to a motorway scheme, and whether it will have a significant effect on the environment,†added Mr Salafia.
“They should consider this independent report in reaching their findings.â€
I await the war this will cause on this forum –
Green light for Lismullen excavation
listen Wednesday, 22 August 2007 16:31An Bord Pleanála has cleared the way for archaeological work to commence on the National Monument at Lismullen in Co Meath, which lies in the path of the M3 motorway.
The decision means that the site, which is close to the Hill of Tara, will be examined by archaeologists before the road is constructed on top of it.
The National Monument at Lismullen consists of two circular enclosures, the largest 80m in diameter, and dates from somewhere between 1000 BC and 400 AD.
AdvertisementLast month, the National Roads Authority submitted its plans to preserve the site ‘by record’. This means the NRA will examine it in detail and then build the M3 over it.
In its decision, An Bord Pleanála gave the NRA the green light because the plan did not constitute a material alteration to the M3 scheme which it had already approved.
An Bord Pleanála had been the last hurdle to be overcome for the controversial proposal. And the decision will come as a big relief to both the NRA and Meath County Council.
However, the news will be a big disappointment to protestors who hoped the Bord might have demanded a new environmental impact assessment.
I await the war this will cause on this forum –
But why would there be a war, Chris? :rolleyes: The democrats on this forum will undoubtedly now accept that a proper and legal decision has been taken on the M3, after due consideration by the impartial instruments and institutions of the state. Due process has been followed to the letter. The minister for the environment naturally accepts the logical and considered outcome.
As they say in Letterfrack – Ar aghaidh leis an obair!! 🙂
Sue ,
Irelands recent history is littered with questionable decisions made in the name of
@Sue wrote:proper …legal….due consideration by the impartial instruments and institutions of the state …. due process
I wont even start into them as the list is longer than something really long !
Its pretty pathetic if thats the best you can come up with for your argument.
As a card carrying eco lulu (Im getting to like that name, all credit to you Sue on that one) I have always acknowledged that a decision has been made and that in some shape or form it represnts a framework in which this scandalous destruction is proceeding. I am arguing primarily against the correctness and wisdom of the decision, the routing and manner of the current work being carried out, and on a secondary level against the legality of it ,something Im happy to let the EU itself investigate, and seeing as how I havent paid any tax here for a couple of years I will let you look after the EU fine when it arrives.@Sue wrote:
As they say in Letterfrack – Ar aghaidh leis an obair!!
Heres something else thats been known to be heard around Letterfrack
If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Henry Thoreauif you’re not paying any tax here, then you’re probably breaking the law already.
typically people who DO pay their taxes will have to foot the large legal bill when the likes of you and Salafia yet again lose your court challenges to these decisions
@Sue wrote:
typically people who DO pay their taxes will have to foot the large legal bill when the likes of you and Salafia yet again lose your court challenges to these decisions
Better we pay that bill than the price we may pay due to you and your ilks’ short-sighted self-interest.
@Sue wrote:
if you’re not paying any tax here, then you’re probably breaking the law already.
typically people who DO pay their taxes will have to foot the large legal bill when the likes of you and Salafia yet again lose your court challenges to these decisions
Au contraire Sue….Im availing of @Sue wrote:
proper and legal decision
taken by @Sue wrote:
the impartial instruments and institutions of the state. Due process has been followed to the letter.
So dont claim that the routing and manner of development of the M3 is correct and proper just cos the decision was signed off in the corridors of our elected power. Getting back to the by-pass , it really is pathetic, as all your lot can base your debate surrounding this issue is that those against it are eco lulu tree hugging Bertie bashers and the main reason pro the routing is cos the decision has a Departmental seal on it. Id say you were just mud slinging although im pretty sure you never even touched the stuff..
This Tara Bypass decision and everything about it stinks on every level … its a scandal …(as are some of are tax statutes 🙂 )
@Sue wrote:
But why would there be a war, Chris? :rolleyes: The democrats on this forum will undoubtedly now accept that a proper and legal decision has been taken on the M3, after due consideration by the impartial instruments and institutions of the state. Due process has been followed to the letter. The minister for the environment naturally accepts the logical and considered outcome.
That may or may not be so in Irish law, but Due Process, in European law, however, requires public consultation, independent assessment and an opportunity to review the decision. There was no public consultation or independent assessment and no opportunity exists to have the decision reviewed, except in the courts. The majority of the public are against the route, independnet reports show the NRA has dumbed down the significance of the site, and the EU is already reviewing the situation. The Irish Government have until Sept 2 to repsond to the Reasoned Opinion sent by the Commission, in which it states that an EIA should have been performed before the decision to demolish the site was made. The Opinion also condemns the NDP 2007-2013, which is what the M3 is now being built under, for lack of public consultation and environmental impact assessment. Now that’s a war worth watching.
vincent don’t waste your time engaging with the asphalt-terrorists like Sue. We’ve all learned to ignore her and her promotion of the automobile over culture, history, heritage and the environment.
@Vincent Salafia wrote:
That may or may not be so in Irish law, but Due Process, in European law, however, requires public consultation, independent assessment and an opportunity to review the decision. There was no public consultation or independent assessment and no opportunity exists to have the decision reviewed, except in the courts. The majority of the public are against the route, independnet reports show the NRA has dumbed down the significance of the site, and the EU is already reviewing the situation. The Irish Government have until Sept 2 to repsond to the Reasoned Opinion sent by the Commission, in which it states that an EIA should have been performed before the decision to demolish the site was made. The Opinion also condemns the NDP 2007-2013, which is what the M3 is now being built under, for lack of public consultation and environmental impact assessment. Now that’s a war worth watching.
I think you should all end your ‘protests’. It was you and your group that was too slow off the mark with the M3 in the beginning. The project went through the planning process intact. Where were you and your group before this motorway was planned? Id really like to know because as I stated earlier I was a very regular visitor to Tara and nobody gave a toss about it then. Seems to me you have a more widespread anti motorway agenda put simply. You lost. Get over it.
So which is it?
Sue, maybe your Berties daughter in disguise
or
promoter of the automobile over culture, history,
Am I Bertie’s daughter or a spokesman for the AA? You eco-warriors should co-ordinate your insults a little more thoughtfully.
While you’re working that one out, here’s some light reading. Further proof that the archeological site, on whose behalf you demand that tens of millions be spent in order to find a new M3 route, is about as important as Sue’s back garden.
Ar aghaidh leis an obair!
Forensic M3 dig unearths Iron Age secrets.
Elaine Keogh
380 words
25 August 2007(c) 2007, The Irish Times.
The National Roads Authority has revealed how it is excavating the controversial new national monument at Lismullen on the route of the €850 million M3 motorway.
Senior archaeologist with the National Roads Authority (NRA), Mary Deevy, admitted that so little evidence remains that “forensic archaeology” will be used to try and reveal exactly what it was used for.
The monument consists of two circular enclosures made of arcs of stake-holes and what appears to be an east-facing entrance; the diameter of the outer enclosure is 80 metres, the inner 16 metres.
Radio carbon dating has dated sample material to the middle Iron Age or around 400 BC.
The site occupies what will be part of the northbound lane of the motorway but it is currently home to four teams of archaeologists and their supervisors and a team of archivists.
The monument is being preserved by record, as directed by the Government and yesterday Ms Deevy, who gave a guided tour of the excavations to a small group of reporters, said “we don’t downplay archaeology as we find it so exciting.”
It appears the site was used for one phase of activity but whether this took place over a day, a year or decades is unclear and what that activity was also remains a mystery.
The archaeologists are taking regular samples of the soil for geo-chemical analysis.
“At this stage we don’t know what it is going to tell us. We are really throwing all the scientific analysis at it because there is so little archaeology here. On a site like this you are essentially down to forensic archaeology.
“We are not finding materials you can hold in your hand, we are essentially looking for trace elements that can be analysed under a microscope chemically. Hopefully we will get results,” she said.
Asked whether the radio carbon dating had tied the site into nearby Tara, Ms Deevy said: “There are so many individual sites on Tara that no matter what period this site was we would find some correlation. Before we had the date we had said it had similarities to a phase of Rath of the synods and that still holds to some extent.”
this thread has gone way past it’s sell by date ~(a bit like 1970’s transport planning philosophy). We’re both rehashing the same arguments. Once again you quote an employee of the motorway builders to back up your argument. Once again, someone will point out the flimsiness of it all. And we’re back to square one. And not an inch of railway has been laid in the meantime, which just shows how damn backward this society really is.
Just to clarify, Sue i am not an “eco-warrior”. I’m a qualified town planner and a practising transportation planner.
Statement by Michael Canney, plaintiff, 29th. August 2007, 13:00. Save Tara/M3 Legal Case
It has never been my ambition to put my name forward in a legal challenge, especially a challenge against such a seemingly impregnable array of powerful political and economic forces. I have done so only as a last resort, and only because it is absolutely essential that the silent majority who oppose this road are given a final chance to have their concerns heard before the courts. While the political and commercial backers of this enterprise have seen fit to ignore public opinion up to now – they cannot so easily dismiss the judiciary.The debate which has raged unevenly between heritage and economics since the Wood Quay protests of the eighties have finally reached its’ nadir at Tara, a low-point that even the most pessimistic among us could not have anticipated. The Tara landscape – the cradle of our civilization, an icon of our nationhood, the mythical heart of our country is to be defaced in the name of private profit and political expediency.
The damage already wrought on the landscape cannot be undone; and the destruction of individual sites over the last six months are individual and collective acts of vandalism. However, the integrity of the landscape as a whole, its stillness and physical beauty are still to be preserved and so this struggle will be conducted by any means and through any mechanism available to the Save Tara Campaign.
No matter how much damage has been done up to this point the road remains totally unacceptable along its present alignment. Over the last few months people say to us “but they are going to build it anyway”, or “sure isn’t the damage already done”. In reply we argue that this road, like Tara itself is a signifier – a signifier of values and attitudes – this debate embodies not only the value we place on our heritage and history, but also signifies how we might deal with the challenges of an energy-poor future and the massive sociological changes that are necessary in order to meet these challenges.
The placing of economic and sectoral interests, above those of the wider environment and society, is one of the main reasons we find ourselves in the environmental mess we are in. Unregulated and profit-driven property development, both residential and commercial, is the primary cause of the transport crises facing the people of Meath. A shocking fact, little reported in the acres of coverage of this issue is that the route of this road was chosen to increase traffic volumes, and therefore tolling profits. This road is engineered to increase car-dependency. Could our transport planners possibly get any more cynical and profit-driven?
Our friends and neighbours in the European Union have voiced grave concerns about this motorway. To deal with one specific concern – the Commission have questioned how the Lismullin National Monument, a massive structure over 80 meters in diameter could have been missed during surveying. The EU maintains that, having missed the structure initially, it’s subsequent discovery should automatically lead to a new Environmental Impact Assessment. There would seem to be a prima facia case that the EIA process is inadequate at best. A less benign interpretation is also possible; our summons maintains that in only carrying out a EIA on one route – the so-called “preferred route” through the Valley, the EIA process is actually subsumed to a function of the route selection process, as opposed to an objective basis upon which to decide upon one route as opposed to another.
It is in the public interest that the procedural and legal shortcomings of the M3 debacle be further examined in the courts. It is in the public interest, not only because of the importance of the Tara landscape in and of itself, but also because this private motorway is iconographic of future planning, transport and environmental policy in this country. Who can look at the Dublin Civic offices now and not regret the lost opportunity of a public park; sweeping up from the river Liffey to the Christchurch Cathedral, a potential resource of immeasurable cultural, educational and aesthetic value? At a time of unprecedented prosperity, who can say that the M3 will be anything but a source of bewilderment and regret to future generations?
The preservation of the Tara landscape can our moment of reflection and renewal, a moment when we realised that our environment is a finite resource and also an opportunity to take strength from a proud and ancient past to meet the challenges ahead.
ENDS
Michael Canney.Irish Times, 30 August 2007 M3 alternative unveiled as new court bid begins
Alison Healy
An alternative route to the M3 motorway in Meath was unveiled yesterday, shortly after the Campaign to Save Tara group announced that they had begun a fresh High Court action to the proposed route.
The Campaign to Save Tara has served a plenary summons on the Ministers for the Environment and Transport, the Attorney General, the National Roads Authority and others.
It is seeking a ruling that construction be halted on the M3 motorway pending the outcome of a case before the European Court of Justice relating to the Lismullin monument. The action has been taken in the name of environmental campaigner Michael Canny. In the plenary summons, he claims that an environmental impact assessment should have been prepared for all seven routes considered, before the preferred route was chosen. He says an environmental impact assessment should now be carried out on the whole route and he claims that the original archaeological works were flawed. The National Roads Authority said it was ready to defend any action against the development and was confident that its legal position was safe.
In a separate development, transport researcher Brian Guckian and environmental campaigner Tadhg Crowley have launched a plan for the Tara-Skryne Valley which they say represents a “win-win solution” for all sides.
Their “Master” (Meath Archaeological Sustainable and Economic Region plan involves using the proposed M3 motorway from Clonee to north of Dunshaughlin. The road would then switch to a 2+1 design, which involves one lane in each direction and a third lane to provide for overtaking. The third lane alternates between each side at 2km intervals and is separated from oncoming traffic with a barrier. This format would continue along the N3 but would then veer west to bypass Navan and Kells.
The promoters said tolls would not be necessary as the modifications to the motorway would save significantly on the capital costs. They have called for the buying out of the public private partnership contract. Mr Guckian claimed the Navan rail link was being stalled because it would have a negative impact on tolls collected.
He said this plan would clear the way for the rapid introduction of the rail link. The plan also provides for improved high capacity coach services. He said the National Roads Authority had rejected the 2+1 design on the basis that people would try to overtake just before the second lane ended. However, Mr Guckian said it had been proven that the design had reduced serious crashes by 50 per cent in Sweden.
The plan also involves the creation of a world heritage park, including the settlements of Navan, Kells, Trim, Slane and Dunshaughlin. They estimate that this would attract at least 400,000 visitors a year, generating more than €75 million in tourism revenue. The plan calls for sustainable agriculture and tourism measures and self sufficient business development. The promoters costed the plan at €1.2 billion, including the road and rail construction and buy-out of the toll contract. They said this compared with a €1.5 billion estimate for the M3.
/////////////////////////////////////////
Irish Independent
EU threatens huge fines if Tara M3 work is not halted Thursday August 30 2007
WORK on the controversial section of the M3 near the Hill of Tara must now stop. And the Government now faces the prospect of being hit with millions of euro in fines if it allows construction to proceed. The Irish Independent has learned that the EU Commission has told the Goverment that no work can be carried out near the national monument discovered at Lismullin, Co Meath. And it has ordered that a comprehensive assessment of what impact the road will have on the Tara Skryne Valley be carried out before the road is built.
The warning came as a legal challenge was launched yesterday aimed at stopping the proposed motorway. Michael Canney from the Campaign to Save Tara group issued legal proceedings against the Minister for the Environment, the Minister for Transport, the National Roads Authority and Eurolink Ltd, the consortium awarded the construction and tolling contract.
The case centres on how the route of the motorway was chosen and Mr Canney alleges that a comprehensive assessment of each route was not carried out in line with EU law before the ‘preferred’ route was chosen.
And the Irish Independent can reveal that the EU Commission has warned the Government that Ireland is in breach of EU law by not carrying out a second investigation after the discovery of a national monument along
the route.
Former Environment Minister Dick Roche, in one of his last acts in office, issued a direction that the Lismullin monument be excavated before the road is built over it. But a spokesperson for EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said yesterday that Ireland was in breach of EU law by not carrying out a second Environmental Impact Assessment after the monument was discovered.
“At the moment we are still talking to the Irish authorities,” the spokesperson said. “We want a second assessment. The road cannot be built until the second assessment is done. “We have a legal disagreement with Ireland. We are saying you have now uncovered this national monument, and you cannot proceed until there is
a second assessment.”
In a separate development Michael Canney is seeking a court ruling that construction works on the motorway should be halted pending the outcome of the case currently being taken by the EU Commission.
The case is the first of three threatened legal challenges to the €800m motorway planned to help ease congestion on the Dublin to Meath route.
Yesterday Mr Canney said it was being taken as a ‘last resort’ and because the ‘political and commercial backers’ of the project had ignored public concerns about the road.
“It has never been my ambition to put my name forward in a legal challenge, especially a challenge against such a seemingly impregnable array of powerful political and economic forces,” he said.
“I have only done so as a last resort, and only because it is absolutely essential that the silent majority who oppose this road have their concerns heard.”
………………………………………
Irish Independent, Thursday August 30 2007TRANSPORT planners in Co Meath have unveiled proposals for a rail link from Dublin to Navan, and a ‘2 + 1’ road, instead of the controversial M3 motorway.
The plan would also see the creation of a Meath World Heritage Park in the Tara Skryne Valley and lead to savings of €300m for the taxpayer, as well as safeguarding archeological remains in the area.
Brian Guckian and Tadhg Crowley said yesterday their plans would solve the transport issues for commuters “in the long term” and protect the heritage of the area, without having to reroute the M3.
They also believe that up to €300m could be saved, which could be used to buy-out the contract to toll the road, saving commuters hundreds of euro every year.
The most radical element of the proposal is for a 2+1 road to be built , instead of a motorway, near the Hill of Tara. These are roads, pioneered in Sweden, where motorists have two lanes of traffic going in one direction, and one lane in the opposite direction, alternating every two kilometres.
This means that drivers are afforded the opportunity to overtake in safely every 2km.
The introduction of the 2+1 roads in Sweden significantly decreased road deaths and, although the National Roads Authority has built a number of these roads here, it recently announced it was abandoning them in favour
of dual carriageways as these could be built at a slightly increased cost.
The Meath Master (Model archeological and Sustainable Economic Region) Plan calls for the M3 to be built as a motorway to Roestown, north of Dunshaughlin, which would change to a 2+1 on the existing N3, and bypass
Navan and on to Kells.No re-routing of the M3 would be required, and traffic volumes would be cut by at least one-third, while a rail link would be re-opened to Navan and Kells.Heavy goods vehicles would be banned from the area and there would be subsidised rail use for commuters.Each train could lead to 500 cars a day being removed from the busy road network, and the cost of building the 2+1 road and rail network to Navan and Kells would be €1.2bn.
The Heritage Park would reconstruct archeological sites and include heritage trails and interpretative centres, and there would be five main settlements of Navan, Kells, Trim, Dunshaughlin and Slane. Heritage stations would be built using model green building practices, and connect networks of heritage trails and provide interpretation centres, bike rental facilities, accommodation and restaurants.
Only small eco-friendly developments would be allowed in the area.The promoters of the plan said yesterday it would be a model of sustainable economic development, which would help develop heritage and tourist activity. They hope to gain support from all political parties.I note that VS has not posted any material on the Tarawatch website for the last 9 days – Is this because his interest is dissipating now that Michael Canny has announced court action, so VS’s opportunity to be seen in the limelight has been lost. It does come across as though this is all he is interested in – to be seen to handle the matter rather than produce effective meaningful results. Another Love VS March is scheduled – I mean Love Tara March
IMO ANYONE who blocks contractors physically trying to do their jobs on the site should be arrested. None of these people have any right to interfer in such a manner in a scheme that has the support of the majority of people and was given the go ahead by those charged on behave of the people to give their backing to such projects or not – in this case Bord Pleanala.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
