Pearse stadium floodlights

dloob

skelliser wrote: »

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

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

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

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

sgthighway

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

Arnold Layne

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

damalo

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

There is something wrong with:

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

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

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

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

mikemac

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

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

cremeegg

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

dec25532

cremeegg wrote: »

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

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

s_carnage

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

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

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

s_carnage

s_carnage wrote: »

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

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

cremeegg

dec25532 wrote: »

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

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


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

ocho

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

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

I hope to God the person responsible is criminally prosecuted.


Planning probe into signature of 'Garda' on GAA document

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wompa1

ocho wrote: »

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

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

I hope to God the person responsible is criminally prosecuted.


Planning probe into signature of 'Garda' on GAA document

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

alibabba

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

Sconsey

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

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

clived2

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

Wompa1

Sconsey wrote: »

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

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

*cough* Drama Queen!

Sconsey

Wompa1 wrote: »

*cough* Drama Queen!

/sarcasm/Well done sir, excellent contribution.

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

Wompa1

Sconsey wrote: »

/sarcasm/Well done sir, excellent contribution.

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

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

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

Sconsey

Wompa1 wrote: »

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

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

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

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

cremeegg

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

sgthighway

Pearse Stadium has been there a long time and at some stage it got planning permission to get revamped. Things like Car Parking & Traffic sould not come into play for an Application for Floodlights becaue if the match was on 2pm on a Sunday you would have the same amount of people there on 7pm on a Saturday. People don't hang around Pearse Stadium after games so there should be no grief on Residents.

What Politicians/City Councillers are in support of the Residents who are objecting?

Sconsey

sgthighway wrote: »

Pearse Stadium has been there a long time and at some stage it got planning permission to get revamped. Things like Car Parking & Traffic sould not come into play for an Application for Floodlights becaue if the match was on 2pm on a Sunday you would have the same amount of people there on 7pm on a Saturday. People don't hang around Pearse Stadium after games so there should be no grief on Residents.

What Politicians/City Councillers are in support of the Residents who are objecting?

Luckily the planning department in the council do not agree with you, they have to consider the impact a development will have from a lot of different aspects.

I'd say the fact that the stadium are in breach of their current planning regarding parking doesn't really help...why should the council believe they will implement a traffic management plan from this application if they said the same thing in the previously granted application but failed to implement it. Looks even worse now that it appears they have forged a cops signature on the traffic management plan for this planning submission. They are the masters of their own downfall here really.

What politicians are in support? I've no clue.

Sconsey

cremeegg wrote: »

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

creambag....lots of issues at play, traffic management is but one, check out my first post for some of them.

How're the cows?

Arnold Layne

sgthighway wrote: »

Pearse Stadium has been there a long time and at some stage it got planning permission to get revamped. Things like Car Parking & Traffic sould not come into play for an Application for Floodlights becaue if the match was on 2pm on a Sunday you would have the same amount of people there on 7pm on a Saturday. People don't hang around Pearse Stadium after games so there should be no grief on Residents.

What Politicians/City Councillers are in support of the Residents who are objecting?

What about before and during the games when cars are parked everywhere, on footpaths, grass and blocking residents driveways. Parking & Traffic were part of the original application that was not adhered to by the GAA. By having more games in the evening the parking and traffic problem becomes more frequent.

skelliser

You just dont want the stadium there. do you, Sconsey? even tho its been there long before your houses, you havent answered my question from a few pages ago.

The stadium is there and long may it continue! it brings much needed business to salthill and galway and so what if you have to put up with minor inconvienence on the 4/5 days a year its used.

skelliser

Sconsey wrote: »

lots of issues at play, traffic management is but one

what are the others?

Sconsey

skelliser wrote: »

You just dont want the stadium there. do you, Sconsey? even tho its been there long before your houses, you havent answered my question from a few pages ago.

The stadium is there and long may it continue! it brings much needed business to salthill and galway and so what if you have to put up with minor inconvienence on the 4/5 days a year its used.

*sigh* I'm not gone on it being there no, does that mean I cannot object to changes being made to it? changes which impact my quality of life?

'The stadium has been there before' ...worst argument ever and you are incorrect, there were houses in the area before the stadium, check out the full thread where I explained why I think that is a really weak argument.

skelliser wrote: »

what are the others?

Light pollution, noise pollution, eyesore, change of use, shadows...

damalo

skelliser wrote: »

The stadium is there and long may it continue! it brings much needed business to salthill and galway and so what if you have to put up with minor inconvienence on the 4/5 days a year its used.

+1 for bringing business elsewhere but there are no local businesses beside pearse stadium. Just residential areas.

Also - where you get the figure of 4/5 fixtures/events p.a is beyond me.

skelliser

how many days was there matches last year?
think there was only 1 champs match, connaught final, and then league and local matches defo less then 10. and the smaller matches generated a couple hundred people, 5 thousand max

Arnold Layne

skelliser wrote: »

how many days was there matches last year?
think there was only 1 champs match, connaught final, and then league and local matches defo less then 10. and the smaller matches generated a couple hundred people, 5 thousand max

So why press ahead with an application for floodlights?