Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
N11/N25 - Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour [route options published]
Comments
-
That statement under "Health & Safety" is quite a claim to make, I wonder how they came up with that fact. Over the last ten years there have been several fatalities on this stretch of road from Enniscorthy. From what I can see in relation to safety on motorways compared to other roadways, this argument is rubbish. If you look at the N/M11 from Dublin to Enniscorthy, all the fatalities (that I can think of) have occurred on sections of single lane carriageway, particularly on the stretch between the Rathnew bypass and the Arklow bypass. It has been proven that motorway driving is far safer.
I remember when the plans were announced for the Gorey bypass. WHile there were several routes proposed, they were largely separated in to two camps - west of the existing N11 and east. The battles then started to see which communities could win the battle to have the motorway put on the opposite side to them. It was obvious that the decision was made at an early stage but the NRA and others kept quite and left the opposing factions to use up their steam on each other. It was the usual, commonly seen tactic of 'divide and conquer'. When the fight fizzled out they moved in and did what they intended doing anyway and threw in a few token 'concessions' to make it look as if the 'burdened' communities had achieved some sort of clawed-back victory.
The only thing that I can see might stop this is complete and utter bankruptcy and the funding vanishes. If the roadway does get done, it will facilitate an easy passage for everyone to make a hasty exit via Roslare when the country implodes. I'm packing my cases now.0 -
thedarkroom wrote: »The only thing that I can see might stop this is complete and utter bankruptcy and the funding vanishes.
Errh... I think this country is already there! Cannot see this road going ahead in the current economic climate given the amount of money needed to just keep our head above water paying for vital services!0 -
Join Date:Posts: 5082
Errh... I think this country is already there! Cannot see this road going ahead in the current economic climate given the amount of money needed to just keep our head above water paying for vital services!thedarkroom wrote: »I remember when the plans were announced for the Gorey bypass. WHile there were several routes proposed, they were largely separated in to two camps - west of the existing N11 and east. The battles then started to see which communities could win the battle to have the motorway put on the opposite side to them. It was obvious that the decision was made at an early stage but the NRA and others kept quite and left the opposing factions to use up their steam on each other. It was the usual, commonly seen tactic of 'divide and conquer'. When the fight fizzled out they moved in and did what they intended doing anyway and threw in a few token 'concessions' to make it look as if the 'burdened' communities had achieved some sort of clawed-back victory.
As for the scheme itself.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - no way is this needed for another decade at least. A motorway - to a tiny town with a dwindling port? When we have places like Galway screaming for a bypass and Adare is kept waiting more than 20 years.
I presume the only reason this is going ahead is because it's designated Euroroute E01 and is eligible for EU funding under the TENs (Trans-European Networks). Does anyone know what the % is that it'll receive?0 -
spacetweek wrote: »If what you say is true, then hats off to the NRA. They sound like they know exactly what they're doing. More of this from the government, please.
Amen to that!0 -
There is no way the EU will fund this project in the near future.
Investment is needed, but in the right places. Economic recovery will not be reliant on a motorway linking Oilgate to Rosslare!
Perhaps investment in time and effort in sorting out the current waste in money by the various government agencies, HSE, quangos, etc.
But this government would not have the balls for it.0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 5082
There is no way the EU will fund this project in the near future.
Investment is needed, but in the right places. Economic recovery will not be reliant on a motorway linking Oilgate to Rosslare!
Perhaps investment in time and effort in sorting out the current waste in money by the various government agencies, HSE, quangos, etc.
But this government would not have the balls for it.0 -
Dublin Rosslare is not a priority under TEN ( Trans European Networks)0
-
spacetweek wrote: »True. I was rethinking this this morning. Although the road is eligible under TEN, presumably these are vetted. No way would the EU sign off on a motorway to a town of 1,000 people.
In fairness, the size of the population would not be much of a justification to use to build this road. The issue is improved access to the Port of Rosslare to cater for it as a transport hub.
While I'm not trying to justify the project in the current economy, I can see how improving this might help promote and expand the port as an access point for freight as well as tourism. Obviously, there are other issues going on around these topics which would mitigate against Rosslare but the potential to increase traffic is obvious. The volcanic ash crisis this year highlighted the fragility of air transport while sea transport is more resilient, while certainly slower.
A bit like Knock Airport, build it and they will come . . . . possibly, but then again, maybe that's not such a good analogy but hopefully you get what I'm trying to say.0 -
One other thing I was looking at- traffic volumes on the Wexford Bypass
from
http://www.wexford.ie/wex/Departments/Roads/NationalRoadsLiaisonOffice/OilgateRosslareHarbourProject/#d.en.8143
PDF here
http://www.wexford.ie/ConstraintsStudy/Constraints%20Study%20Rev%20B/Constraints%20Study%20Report%20Part%20A%20Rev%20B.pdf
North of Bypass 2007 - (3 points sampled)
17.5k, 17k, 18k
Bypass 2007 (4 points)
16k,18k, 15k,11.5k
The groups opposing the new road are using traffic counts nearer Rosslare (ie when Wexford Town traffic is eliminated) in support of their "do the minimum/don't by-pass the by-pass" proposals
Given those traffic levels, are we close to when at least a D2AP is required for these sections? (Wexford Town to end of Enniscorthy by-pass)0 -
-
Advertisement
-
thedarkroom wrote: »I'm sure I'll kick myself for asking this question but what is a 'D2AP' ?
D2 = 2 lane dual carriageway
AP = all purpose
I'd have something like this in mind.
http://www.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Rooskey,+Ireland&sll=51.859107,-10.110168&sspn=0.239176,0.617294&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Rooskey,+County+Leitrim,+Ireland&ll=53.860026,-7.905781&spn=0.230014,0.617294&z=11&layer=c&cbll=53.860026,-7.905781&panoid=rIgrUxK6X5dI8k0sGKuMkQ&cbp=12,184.79,,0,20.420 -
mac.the.hat wrote: »The existing Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour road has been classified as a safe road. Ok, there have been accidents over the years but in terms of the overall safety record, it has been pretty good. It is generally accepted that motorways are a safer type of road but when accidents happen, they are far more serious and cost the state far more. Let's face it, if someone falls off a bike, it's going to cost the state when they get to the hospital, just imagine what that cost would be in the case of a motorway accident.
Who has classified it as a safe road? Where may I view this formal classification?The NRA are out of control. The Minister for Transport has been asked officially for information relating to the proposed development and his response was that he didn't know, it was an NRA issue. Does anybody remember voting for the NRA in the last election? I certainly don't.There is a joint party agreement in place that all Wexford TDs and County Councillors will support this project. What the hell is going on here? What happened to democracy?
On the one hand you complain that the NRA aren't elected. On the other hand, you complain about the views of those who are elected. It is quite possible for all elected representatives to favour the road; it doesn't mean that democracy is broken.Let's look at it from another angle, the NRA Code of Practice for Business Members also states under Loyalty that 'Staff members owe to the NRA loyalty and commitment in all its activities. Staff members should support colleagues and the NRA in all matters related to NRA activities. They should not undermine through action or omission the goals and objectives of NRA. All grievances and concerns should be progressed through agreed internal channels prior to any action that might affect public confidence or the good name of the Authority.' How does this affect Mr Eddie Breen, Wexford County Manager and member of the board of the NRA? Is his loyalty with the people of Wexford or with the NRA? He is being employed as Wexford County Manager and at the same time, he is required to be ultimately loyal to the NRA. Now, that does not sound right does it?
How is loyalty to Wexford and loyalty to the NRA mutually exclusive? If the NRA believe that the motorway will benefit Wexford, and if Eddie Breen as County Manager also believes this, then there's no conflict, is there?Let's look at it from another angle again... a quick calculation reveals that an unnecessary motorway or dual carriageway through Co Wexford from Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour will directly consume close to 1000 acres of agricultural land and replace it with tarmac and cement. How is this going to effect Co Wexford? This goes well beyond the scope of an EIS.Who is going to pay for the development of this unnecessary road? Europe? Not on your nelly... the Irish Taxpayers will be paying for this one. Yep, they are the same ones that are being screwed day in, day out and now they are getting hit again for an unnecessary motorway/dual carriageway. As one of that category, I am certainly not happy about it... are you? It's not just the Wexford taxpayers that are going to be paying for this one, it is every taxpayer in Ireland.
You seem obsessed with Wexford to the point where you can be (perhaps wrongly) charged with NIMBYism at worst or parochialism at best. This is a national road improvement scheme that happens to run through Wexford. It's not just about how it will affect Wexford... and most of the effects, at a national level, would be seen as positive by Irish motorists. I'm sure Wexford people are perfectly happy to drive on the M11 from Gorey to the M50 after all.
I actually agree partially with several of your other points, but think that this scheme should be temporarily suspended or downscaled to Type 2 Dual Carriageway. I think a motorway is overkill, so I'm with you on that, but I still thought it necessary to point out what I consider to be some of the more blatant weaknesses in your bulleted list above.0 -
Without the NRA, this country would still have no road system - in fact, the establishment of the NRA was one of the very few things our politicians ever did right. In fact, I'd be all for scrapping VRT and Road Tax (post 2015) in favour of allowing the NRA is raise its own funds. The government would still get more than enough money through VAT on car purchases @ 21%. Half of all petrol taxes should also go to the NRA (as a semi state) which would also be in charge of the regional (R) roads. We should apply this model to as many infrastructural services as possible thereby getting further away from the central melting pot of Irish politics - I'd also scrap the HSE administration completely!
Let's hear it for the NRA!0 -
[QUOTE=mac.the.hat;68663412
- Let's look at it from another angle again... a quick calculation reveals that an unnecessary motorway or dual carriageway through Co Wexford from Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour will directly consume close to 1000 acres of agricultural land and replace it with tarmac and cement. How is this going to effect Co Wexford? This goes well beyond the scope of an EIS.
If there is anything worse than a NIMBY it has to be a NIMBY that can't count. That is the only reason why that figure goes beyond the 'scope' of the EIS.....that and the fact that the person who prepared the EIS can count.
The land take will be a strip 30m-32m wide in most cases. The road is at most 30km long = 30,000 metres x 30m wide = 900,000 square metres. It will probably be less because the land take is unlikely to be that long ....900,000 metres is an extreme outlier.
At 10,000 sq m to a Hectare that is 90 Hectares or 222 Acres..NOT 1000 Acres
Some of that land is already TAKEN, eg the EXISTING WEXFORD BYPASS. The Existing Wexford Bypass is NOT AGRICULTURAL LAND mainly because it is like .......a road like. Other sections will on be a bridge(s) across the Slaney which is not agricultural either. Other sections will go through scrub/forestry...also not agricultural.
We can already reduce the land take assumption by at least 22 Acres for that already taken land on the Wexford Bypass meaning that the "Agricultural Land" take is unlikely to exceed 200 acres in total and will be less than that if some of the section south of the Wexford Bypass is Online rather than Offline.
Please don't insult our intelligence around here with silly numbers like this. I have attached all Irish NRA Road Design Standards in a single file below. Open it up and read it willya and don't come back in here until you remove that risible assertion from your website and post, both0 -
The existing Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour road has been classified as a safe road.
It has? According to the latest EuroRAP information, the section of this route from Rosslare Harbour to the N11/N25 junction has a Medium Risk profile, meaning that you're much more likely to be killed or seriously injured on this section than on roads with a Low Risk profile.
Even the N11 from its junction with the N25 to Enniscorthy has a Low-Medium Risk profile, demonstrating that it's not as safe as a road with a Low Risk profile.
The only roads in Ireland with a Low Risk profile are either motorways or dual-carriageways.Ok, there have been accidents over the years but in terms of the overall safety record, it has been pretty good.
As good as if it had been a motorway? According to the EuroRAP figures, single-carriageway roads carry 10% of the traffic on the TEN-T road network (both the N11 and N25, including Rosslare Harbour to Oilgate are part of the TEN-T road network) but 25% of all fatal and serious accidents happen on single-carriageway roads. In contrast, 75% of all TEN-T traffic was on motorways, but only 55% of fatal and serious accidents happened on TEN-T motorways.
In other words, motorways are much safer than single-carriageway roads.It is generally accepted that motorways are a safer type of road but when accidents happen, they are far more serious and cost the state far more. Let's face it, if someone falls off a bike, it's going to cost the state when they get to the hospital, just imagine what that cost would be in the case of a motorway accident.
And what happens when there's a head-on collision between two vehicles when someone makes an unsafe overtaking manoeuvre?
Divided roads are much safer than undivided roads.
The Rosslare to Oilgate route does not require a motorway IMO, but a 2+2 (a Type 2 Dual-Carriageway in NRA jargon) road with grade-separated junctions would be a much safer road.0 -
mac.the.hat wrote: »
- According to the Wexford County Council/NRA traffic projections, vehicle volumes are increasing by 2%-3% every year. According to the fixed traffic counters (countrywide), the volumes are decreasing by significantly higher percentages.
- Current traffic volumes show no need whatsoever for a major road improvement project between Oilgate and Rosslare Harbour and in line with the current trends, there won't be a need for a long time to come.
- Practically speaking, there aren't traffic issues on the road between Oilgate and Rosslare Harbour. There may be occasional slowdowns caused by traffic from the ferries but they certainly don't warrant anything like what is being proposed. For example, I arrived at the Whitford Roundabout one morning last week and met the ferry traffic... ok, I was waiting for 38 seconds... that I can handle. There is no obvious need.
- Taking into account the fact that the AA are telling us that there are 30,000 less cars on our roads, the sizeable decrease in rental fleets and the inaccuracies in the projections, one would wonder exactly what is going on.
- Rosslare Europort does not need a bigger road. Volumes going through the port peaked in 2006, without a motorway/dual carriageway and have been declining ever since. This is documented in the statistics available on their website.
- The existing Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour road has been classified as a safe road. Ok, there have been accidents over the years but in terms of the overall safety record, it has been pretty good. It is generally accepted that motorways are a safer type of road but when accidents happen, they are far more serious and cost the state far more. Let's face it, if someone falls off a bike, it's going to cost the state when they get to the hospital, just imagine what that cost would be in the case of a motorway accident.
- The NRA are out of control. The Minister for Transport has been asked officially for information relating to the proposed development and his response was that he didn't know, it was an NRA issue. Does anybody remember voting for the NRA in the last election? I certainly don't.
- There is a joint party agreement in place that all Wexford TDs and County Councillors will support this project. What the hell is going on here? What happened to democracy?
- The NRA Code of Practice for Business Members states quite clearly that the five underlying principles are Integrity, Loyalty, Legal and Regulatory Compliance, Fairness and Confidentiality. I can't quote the whole thing but you can read it here http://www.nra.ie/Publications/DownloadableDocumentation/GeneralPublications/file,16161,en.pdf - For example, under Integrity they state that staff members should 'ensure that there is no conflict of interest between the discharge of their duties as staff members of the NRA and any beneficial interest they may have. A conflict of interest arises where involvement or association with an outside activity could influence or be seen to influence how the NRA carries out its business'. Who is influencing who between the NRA and the Co Council?
- Let's look at it from another angle, the NRA Code of Practice for Business Members also states under Loyalty that 'Staff members owe to the NRA loyalty and commitment in all its activities. Staff members should support colleagues and the NRA in all matters related to NRA activities. They should not undermine through action or omission the goals and objectives of NRA. All grievances and concerns should be progressed through agreed internal channels prior to any action that might affect public confidence or the good name of the Authority.' How does this affect Mr Eddie Breen, Wexford County Manager and member of the board of the NRA? Is his loyalty with the people of Wexford or with the NRA? He is being employed as Wexford County Manager and at the same time, he is required to be ultimately loyal to the NRA. Now, that does not sound right does it?
- Let's look at it from another angle again... a quick calculation reveals that an unnecessary motorway or dual carriageway through Co Wexford from Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour will directly consume close to 1000 acres of agricultural land and replace it with tarmac and cement. How is this going to effect Co Wexford? This goes well beyond the scope of an EIS.
- Who is going to pay for the development of this unnecessary road? Europe? Not on your nelly... the Irish Taxpayers will be paying for this one. Yep, they are the same ones that are being screwed day in, day out and now they are getting hit again for an unnecessary motorway/dual carriageway. As one of that category, I am certainly not happy about it... are you? It's not just the Wexford taxpayers that are going to be paying for this one, it is every taxpayer in Ireland.
- Our hospitals and health servies are creaking at the seams. Last night there were 228 patients on trollies throughout Ireland. Why the hell are our Government even considering spending close to 1 billion on an unnecessary motorway/whatever when our sick cannot be given hospital beds.
- At the end of Q3 2010, our National Debt was 88.6 billion and again, why is the building of an expensive, unnecessary road even being considered when we are looking at these sort of figures. In 1980, it was 10 billion and then came the boom years and where did it go? It needs to be reduced and not added to. We have enough problems with NAMA and the banks and the unemployment and the hospitals and...
- The ridiculous waste of funds on these white elephant roads has been criticised by An Taisce, Dr Edgar Morgenroth from the ESRI and others. If there is a need, do it... if not, don't waste taxpayers money when it can be put to much better uses.
- At the end of the day, if the road is developed as the errr 'gateway to Europe', what exactly is it going to be connecting to? A ferry in Rosslare Harbour that will in turn connect with National Roads in Wales or National Roads in France. Now, that's some joke!
0 -
IMO, An Taisce are a shower of serial objectors - if they had their way, we'd be living in a large folk park called Ireland. In my mind, they are not a credible body and brings into question anyone who has to quote them to help support an argument.
Now, the average traffic figures for Rosslare (East of Kilrane) are 6192 PCUs in 2010 (down from 7076 in 2006). However, that count is taken more or less just after the Port of Rosslare. That doesn't even take in Rosslare Strand let alone the town of Wexford. These figures are also recessionary. Even if an S2 would suffice, I believe that the N25 (E01) goes directly through villages - hardly a way to showcase Ireland to visitors etc. Obviously, such places should be bypassed. I don't have any other figures, but it is highly probable that a 2+2 (some of it online South of Wexford town) would be the best option - certainly don't think a motorway is needed though.
Also, the depths of Rosslare Port itself could surely be overcome with jetties etc - I myself will have Braemore Port nearby - my only objection is how it will affect the strand, but otherwise, I welcome it! Maybe the people around the Rosslare area could adapt a more positive attitude towards their Port - surely a source of employment! This is the time when we all as a people have to think a little beyond ourselves and pull together - this country (that people died for) is in big trouble and the last thing we need are NIMBYs and administrative monsters like the HSE etc.
Simple!0 -
+1 @ Pete_Cavan, Sponge Bob, marmurr1916
I sat down to try and answer some of these points this morning but decided I couldn't be bothered. People like the original poster don't want answers to their points, they just want to promote an agenda. But it's good that they get challenged on those grounds.0 -
+1 @ Pete_Cavan, Sponge Bob, marmurr1916
I sat down to try and answer some of these points this morning but decided I couldn't be bothered. People like the original poster don't want answers to their points, they just want to promote an agenda. But it's good that they get challenged on those grounds.
...yes indeed, there's no response from the original poster so far, although the post was made only this morning - however, the overall tone of the post certainly sounds like NIMBYism to me!0 -
Irish and Proud wrote: »my only objection is how it will affect the strand, but otherwise, I welcome it! Maybe the people around the Rosslare area could adapt a more positive attitude towards their Port - surely a source of employment!
There was already a route selection process completed (in 2002, I think) for the portion of the road closest to the Harbour and the Strand. There weren't too many objections from the local residents - many of whom presumably depend on the port for their livelihood.0 -
Advertisement
-
Guys,
I'm bowing out of this one. I'm very new to boards.ie which makes me a newbie and not a nimby. I thought I was getting involved in an open discussion. I'm not a professional and I didn't make my post to get savaged.
If this is what newbies get around here, it doesn't say a great deal for boards.ie
For the record, I would have welcomed answers to my points which is the reason why I made them and I was not trying to promote an agenda. They were made in the course of a discussion, or at least I thought they were.
By the way, indications from the Roads Liasion Office are that the final road will be a lot wider than 32m and a number of the possible routes are well in excess of 30km in length.
The reason why I didn't return sooner was because I was taking it easy today... it is Sunday after all.
Bye0 -
mac.the.hat wrote: »Guys,
I'm bowing out of this one. I'm very new to boards.ie which makes me a newbie and not a nimby. I thought I was getting involved in an open discussion. I'm not a professional and I didn't make my post to get savaged.
If this is what newbies get around here, it doesn't say a great deal for boards.ie
For the record, I would have welcomed answers to my points which is the reason why I made them and I was not trying to promote an agenda. They were made in the course of a discussion, or at least I thought they were.
By the way, indications from the Roads Liasion Office are that the final road will be a lot wider than 32m and a number of the possible routes are well in excess of 30km in length.
The reason why I didn't return sooner was because I was taking it easy today... it is Sunday after all.
Bye
This is an open discussion and you are free to reply to our posts and counteract the points we have put forward. I will (and I'm sure most of the other posters here will also) happily change my opinion on the issue if you can put forward a credible and reasonable argument as to why I should. However, as this is an open discussion you should be prepared for others to question what you have said, and some of these responses may disagree with you (this may come as a surprise but even if you are 100% correct there is always someone who will disagree with you). If you can not adequately rebut our arguments you should accept that you have been misinformed and in future do your own research and not believe everything you hear. You are of course entitled to your opinion and you can continue to believe whatever you want, but you should be careful about spreading false information. Please do not delete your subscription to boards.ie because a few people disagree with you as this is the sign of an extremely immature, stubborn and closed minded individual. I am trying not to sound condescending here but if you can not accept what I have just said you do not deserve a public forum in which to voice your opinions imo.0 -
Thanks for your post Pete.
I'd love to have had a discussion on the subject. That was the reason why I signed up and posted in the first place. Of course there are going to be people who will disagree regardless and the is the point in discussing a subject, you get to hear everybodys position and you learn.
Unfortunately, responses like this don't do much for open discussion and they aren't particularly helpful to somebody new who would like to participate in a discussion.Please don't insult our intelligence around here with silly numbers like this. I have attached all Irish NRA Road Design Standards in a single file below. Open it up and read it willya and don't come back in here until you remove that risible assertion from your website and post, both
I really would love to have participated in the discussion and I would love to have heard your opinions on my points and to contribute but I really don't feel welcome. My reason for bowing out is nothing to do with small mindedness, being stubborn or immature, it is to do with common courtesy.
Maybe you could all go a bit easier on the next person who tries to get involved.
m@c0 -
mac.the.hat wrote: »
For the record, I would have welcomed answers to my points which is the reason why I made them and I was not trying to promote an agenda. They were made in the course of a discussion, or at least I thought they were.
They were not _questions_, they were a series of assertions. The post in fact was not so much a series of questions or indeed 'points' so much as a manifesto.
I will not dignify most of the post/points/manifestro with any commentry whatsoever but that is my opinion of it taken as a whole.By the way, indications from the Roads Liasion Office are that the final road will be a lot wider than 32m and a number of the possible routes are well in excess of 30km in length.
Even were I wrong on the route that is eventually selected and the road were therefore 50 km long (ie the longest possible route which does not recycle the existing bypass ) and the land take along that entire road were to be 50m of which 50m the road itself including median and 2 hard shoulders and a 2m verge on each side will be 26.0m wide leaving 12m of dead land on each side of the motorway along the entire length.
That is 50,000m x 50m wide or 2,500,000 square meters. This is 250 hectares which is 617 Acres not 1,000 acres. By no stretch of my notably febrile imagination could I possibly get the land take for this project to 1,000 acres of agricultural land.
Some of the regulars around here will no doubt goad me into trying to inflate the land take to 1,000 acres and to ensure that the entire 1,000 acres is agricultural land and will sit over me like a pack of gargoyles to ensure I do not touch a single bog or coppice on my 50km perambulation across Wexford. To them I say now that I simply cannot do it.
The Bord Pleanála Inspector will probably burst his hole laughing when some idiot like Isaac hops up at their hearing with this assertion....unless he/she is a regular reader of this forum that is :cool:0 -
Sponge Bob wrote: »Some of the regulars around here will no doubt goad me....and will sit over me like a pack of gargoyles....
I feel your pain Sponge!0 -
mac.the.hat wrote: »Thanks for your post Pete.
I'd love to have had a discussion on the subject. That was the reason why I signed up and posted in the first place. Of course there are going to be people who will disagree regardless and the is the point in discussing a subject, you get to hear everybodys position and you learn.
Unfortunately, responses like this don't do much for open discussion and they aren't particularly helpful to somebody new who would like to participate in a discussion.
I really would love to have participated in the discussion and I would love to have heard your opinions on my points and to contribute but I really don't feel welcome. My reason for bowing out is nothing to do with small mindedness, being stubborn or immature, it is to do with common courtesy.
Maybe you could all go a bit easier on the next person who tries to get involved.
m@c
You completely misunderstood my post. My point was that you are the one preventing the open discussion you claim to be seeking. You listed the token arguments always put forward in opposition of a road, failing to realise that these arguments are easily counter by those with even a basic understanding of the issues involved. The arguments you put forward may be accepted as gospel by the auld fellas on the high stools at your local but not around here. The next part of an open discussion should have taken the form of you offering some sort of rebuttal to the points we put forward but your inability to do so leads me to believe your opposition to the road is based entirely on blind NIMBYism. Instead of participating in the discussion any more you claim the big boys are ganging up on you and you cry that you "don't feel welcome". It is quite clear from this that the last thing you are interested in is participating in an open discussion.0 -
There was already a route selection process completed (in 2002, I think) for the portion of the road closest to the Harbour and the Strand. There weren't too many objections from the local residents - many of whom presumably depend on the port for their livelihood.
That would make sense - afterall, I was surprised that people would be happy to have trucks rolling through their villages, and as you said, they would probably depended on the port for their economic wellbeing. I'd say that any NIMBYism would be coming from much further inland.
What just annoys me is that the anti motorway campaign seems a bit on the pretentious side - putting up economic, feasibility and environmental arguments etc when it would seem that the real motive is in protecting local properties.
Now, I don't agree that a motorway beyond Wexford Town is needed and I don't think we should just build motorways for the sake of it, but for the most part, motorways that have recently been built seem to have traffic levels well in excess of 10,000 PCUs (and going up in many cases), so even a 2+2 (20k PCU Capicity) might not be sufficient by the design year. However, I think a 2+2 would be right for the N25 South of Wexford Town (currently @ 6192 PCUs and falling) and should be well sufficient for the next 20 years or so. I believe some of the current road has been classed by EuroRAP as a Medium Risk - so I think the provision of continuous safe overtaking plus a safety barrier separating traffic flow would be of benefit too.
Regards!0 -
mac.the.hat wrote: »For the record, I would have welcomed answers to my points which is the reason why I made them and I was not trying to promote an agenda.
Your points were answered. In my case, I answered your point about road safety (your assertion that the road between Rosslare Harbour and Oilgate had been classified as a safe route) with facts from EuroRAP which disproved your assertion.
Other posters responded in like manner.
Your response? You're all meanies, I'm going home to mammy..0 -
With all due respect, I don't think you're being fair.
I signed up because I thought I was getting involved in a discussion. I didn't expect to get skinned alive on my first post.
I think the mere fact that I've come back again and again to see what is being said proves that I would like to discuss the issues involved and that I quite obviously do respect your opinions.
I wouldn't mind having another shot if you don't mind but can you guys please take it a bit easier on me for a while anyways. I'm trying to find my feet. I'm new to boards.ie and forums, I'm not a 'roads professional' and I'm seriously outnumbered by you guys who obviously are quite familiar with each other but I would like to find out what you think, learn a little and maybe make a few online acquaintances in the process.
m@c0 -
Advertisement
-
Try one point at a time, consider this mythic land take of 1,000 acres a dead end.0
Advertisement