Petition to Prioritise the Ring Road over the Central Access Scheme

Threadhead

Because all those people who marched in favour of the CAS and signed the petition demanding it really made their voices heard.

S28382

Threadhead wrote: »

Because all those people who marched in favour of the CAS and signed the petition demanding it really made their voices heard.

Why would anyone who supports the CAS want to go marching in support of it when its already got the go ahead?

Dozen Wicked Words

I don't have opinion either way, but 6,500 signatures on a petition is significant in such a small town/city. People clearly do care as this thread shows, not really seen anything as devisive on any other Kilkenny thread anyway. Belittling opinions of either side just seems childish to me.

Threadhead

S28382 wrote: »

Why would anyone who supports the CAS want to go marching in support of it when its already got the go ahead?

And if it doesn't go ahead do you think they will take to the streets to protest?

S28382

Threadhead wrote: »

And if it doesn't go ahead do you think they will take to the streets to protest?

No I doubt it very much tbh I don't really care who goes out marching or protesting the fact of the matter is that Kilkenny as a town historical or not will not be affected in a detrimental way if this does go ahead. The whole protesting and marching lark is nonsense with regards the building of this bridge.

catbear

6,000 is a significant number when matched against how many actually vote in council elections.

Mankbag

road_high wrote: »

Exactly. Enough taxpayers money squandered on archeology on an irrelevant shack of a house or two on vicar st.I hope people actually accept now what the experts are saying and move on.

Believing what the experts were saying is one of the things that has this country the way it is.

It's experts who have given us that abomination of a Parade "plaza" (or whatever name they attached to it to make it sound more exotic than it was). Forgive me if I choose not to believe anything they say.

road_high

Mankbag wrote: »

Believing what the experts were saying is one of the things that has this country the way it is.

It's experts who have given us that abomination of a Parade "plaza" (or whatever name they attached to it to make it sound more exotic than it was). Forgive me if I choose not to believe anything they say.

They're archeologists (presumably qualified as such) saying there's nothing significant in those houses (which is hardly surprising). They were just reporting back on what they found, i sinecerely doubt they're making it up.

Mankbag

road_high wrote: »

They're archeologists (presumably qualified as such) saying there's nothing significant in those houses (which is hardly surprising). They were just reporting back on what they found, i sinecerely doubt they're making it up.

Fair enough. It's the experts in County Hall I'd be more worried about.

Einhard

6000 isn't all that significant in a county with a population of almost 100 000, considering the efforts put into collecting the signatures, and the nature of the petition. I was with a few people on High St and we were asked to sign it. My friends did; I didn't. I asked them why they signed it after, and it was obvious they hadn't thought it through at all. It was more a case of, "Why not?" Obviously that wouldn't have been the case of all those who signed it, but I'd bet it was for a large proportion.

In saying this, I'm not dismissing the concerns of anyone or belittling them. It just always annoys me that people assume that they are part of some form of "silent majority". It's such a dickish idea. I'm in the right and everyone agrees with me, but eh, I have no proof of that because, er, those who agree with me keep quiet about it. Hmmm, such logic.

If you feel a certain way about something, great. Good luck with that. I'll respect your opinion even if I don't agree with it. But please stop claiming that everyone else feels the same way unless you can actually back this up with some evidence.

catbear

I hate admitting it but the greatest ally the CAS is the Greens, they can't be trusted to open a bottle.

They've allowed the argument to be framed around a few houses when in reality the real problem is that this proposed road only delivers people to traffic bottlenecks quicker rather than relieving congestion.

The completion of the ringroad is both logical and practical.

Mocadonna

catbear wrote: »

I hate admitting it but the greatest ally the CAS is the Greens, they can't be trusted to open a bottle.

They've allowed the argument to be framed around a few houses when in reality the real problem is that this proposed road only delivers people to traffic bottlenecks quicker rather than relieving congestion.

The completion of the ringroad is both logical and practical.

Exactly, look at the petition title. Nothing mentioned about saving houses.

Unfortunately though, I think this is the only way that you'll manage to turn the council as they seem hell bent on this project, and can't for some reason see the logic of taking traffic out of town. So without getting an archaeological reason or a court order it's going to be very difficult to stop this. Though maybe I'm giving them too much credit! Their talk of a "silent majority" etc is just introducing more red herrings for the pro CAS side to attack and doesn't develop the debate.

Rantan

from an anti CAS side I was very alarmed when the focus of attention shifted to the houses...it dissapointed me a lot really....it detracts from the serious concerns that most objectors have
ie. is it actually necessary?/completing the ring road/ its overall impact on the historic environment in that part of town(being the site of the origins of KK) etc etc...

if the houses are found to be modern and not to have any arch. significance, it justifies the entire scheme for teh council..but actually does nothing to address the core issues - which most CAS objectors have voiced here.
If the scheme had genuine merit I would expect the majority of objectors would not oppose the removal of those houses, assuming the correct procedures were carried out,,,ie. research, investigation and any rescue arch. that was needed

Threadhead

Rantan wrote: »

from an anti CAS side I was very alarmed when the focus of attention shifted to the houses...it dissapointed me a lot really....it detracts from the serious concerns that most objectors have
ie. is it actually necessary?/completing the ring road/ its overall impact on the historic environment in that part of town(being the site of the origins of KK) etc etc...

if the houses are found to be modern and not to have any arch. significance, it justifies the entire scheme for teh council..but actually does nothing to address the core issues - which most CAS objectors have voiced here.
If the scheme had genuine merit I would expect the majority of objectors would not oppose the removal of those houses, assuming the correct procedures were carried out,,,ie. research, investigation and any rescue arch. that was needed

I absolutely agree. I'm very much anti CAS but if those houses have no significance then I don't see why at the least, they shouldn't make way for an entrance to the redeveloped brewery site. Or something else of use that's not a bridge to the mart.

redtelephone

Looks like the CAS might be in trouble.

http://www.kilkennypeople.ie/news/kilkenny-news/john-bradley-says-vicar-street-is-medieval-1-5793876

http://www.antaisce.ie/Press/AnTaisceRelatedNewsReleases/tabid/1024/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/1308/An-Taisce-asks-that-Kilkenny-house-be-declared-a-National-Monument.aspx

Threadhead

Potentially bad news for having another viable entrance to the brewery site.

Potentially good news for not having another big ugly bridge that no one needs.

road_high

I despair...no one gave a toss about these old shacks until the road was planned. It really is incredible, you'd swear listening to their propaganda KK Council had some kind of huge Ceaucescu-esque plan to demolish half of medieval Kilkenny and bury it under concrete.

Sky King

That would be class!

Anca Petrescu is dead unfortunately. She died recently enough actually.

linny

road_high wrote: »

I despair...no one gave a toss about these old shacks until the road was planned. It really is incredible, you'd swear listening to their propaganda KK Council had some kind of huge Ceaucescu-esque plan to demolish half of medieval Kilkenny and bury it under concrete.

couldn't of put it better myself

Cabaal

road_high wrote: »

I despair...no one gave a toss about these old shacks until the road was planned. It really is incredible, you'd swear listening to their propaganda KK Council had some kind of huge Ceaucescu-esque plan to demolish half of medieval Kilkenny and bury it under concrete.

They serve a purpose to stop the CAS,
Perhaps not ideal but its a means to an end.

Lets be honest, Kilkenny cc have allowed some awful things to happen in the city

How they ever allowed these to be built - http://goo.gl/maps/w2ndK is beyond me.

I don't blame people for not trusting the council, you've only to go to Dublin to see what the council will do to get what they want regardless of what is found....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_Quay

catbear

With the planning phase of a new bridge to join the ring road instigated the more delayed the CAS gets the better.

Although one of the aims of the N77 extension is to "complement the proposed Central Access Scheme' I don't see how the CAS is in any way integral to the completion of the ring road; we could benefit from the extension while the CAS will end up a white elephant.

road_high

Sky King wrote: »

That would be class!

Anca Petrescu is dead unfortunately. She died recently enough actually.

Fat chance! It seems you can't change a paving slab in KK any more with uproar from some "interest" group or other.
I believe the local authroities here do broadly get alot right in their planning. New infrastructure is welcomed with open arms in so many other towns and cities but in Kilkenny you will have some busybodies crowing "it's a waste of money or not needed or detrimental to the Medieval fabric of Kilkenny" (which appears to be the favourite catchphrase these days).

Silverscott

The ring road will go ahead, heard from a few people who own the land in the way and bits need to be taken etc. When is the ?

road_high

Silverscott wrote: »

The ring road will go ahead, heard from a few people who own the land in the way and bits need to be taken etc. When is the ?

CPO's were issued there lately alright.

catbear

road_high wrote: »

CPO's were issued there lately alright.

That's great to hear, once people know the northern side of the city will be linked up they'll be less inclined to support the CAS.

linny

hopefully now it will be full steam ahead
http://www.kilkennypeople.ie/news/kilkenny-news/final-reports-vicar-street-houses-not-medieval-1-6008074

road_high

linny wrote: »

hopefully now it will be full steam ahead
http://www.kilkennypeople.ie/news/kilkenny-news/final-reports-vicar-street-houses-not-medieval-1-6008074

I'd love to know how much taxpayers money was squandered over this? These houses were as medieval as the Ring road ....I do have a problem with the design of the bridge itself, it looks awful in the plan pics.

kikel

This is a real shame in my opinion. I really think that future generations will look at the new bridge as badly designed and thought out. Just because the city has funding but this development does not mean we have to build it.

Their are other way to develop our city rather than this plan.

I'm actually really heart broken/upset by the idea of this bridge been built.

Grats

Whatever your view on the new bridge and the CAS, using the Vicar St houses as an excuse to halt the project was/is pathetic. As another poster said, the squandering of money is sad to say the least. I have no problem with locals expressing their disproval of the bridge but I feel they were misled into supporting the retention of those houses at a huge cost.

Amusing really that the same people who engaged in trying to retain the houses had nothing to say about the state that Greens Bridge is in for more than twenty years. Hopefully we can now look forward to having the scaffolding removed from the Bridge, the stone wall replaced and have it pedestrianised when the new bridge opens.

redtelephone

Grats wrote: »

SNIP.. Hopefully we can now look forward to having the scaffolding removed from the Bridge, the stone wall replaced and have it pedestrianised when the new bridge opens.

It seems that another new pedestrian bridge called the Greensbridge Way is to be built upstream of Greensbridge according to the Draft Development Plan 2014 - 2020 section 10.1.2.4 "....the Greensbridge Way will provide a pedestrian/cycle crossing upstream of Greensbridge."

http://www.ourplan.kilkenny.ie/node/134

Cabaal

The scary thing is most people in Kilkenny don't have a clue what the centra;l access scheme bridge will look like,

When I've described it or showed them a picture of the current design to anyone I've talked to they've said they don't want it built there, they also didn't realise how close to John's bridge the new bridge would be.

redtelephone

Cabaal wrote: »

The scary thing is most people in Kilkenny don't have a clue what the centra;l access scheme bridge will look like,

When I've described it or showed them a picture of the current design to anyone I've talked to they've said they don't want it built there, they also didn't realise how close to John's bridge the new bridge would be.

Like the pedestrian bridge, it will have been built before people realise how unsuitable the design is. Funny that the council hired a PR company to issue its latest statement on Vicar St. Wonder how much money it cost?

miece16

get it up i say. can't wait for the new road and bridge in the city

Einhard

Cabaal wrote: »

The scary thing is most people in Kilkenny don't have a clue what the centra;l access scheme bridge will look like,

When I've described it or showed them a picture of the current design to anyone I've talked to they've said they don't want it built there, they also didn't realise how close to John's bridge the new bridge would be.

And yet so many people are against it despite knowing very little about it.

Cabaal

Einhard wrote: »

And yet so many people are against it despite knowing very little about it.

Most people are against it simply because its poorly designed and cuts the city in half, thats reason enough.

The whole plan is a cop out being used instead of finishing the ringroad, very shortsighted.

When you see the actual designs of the road, its placement and the design of the bridge things get so much worse

Mankbag

Grats wrote: »

Whatever your view on the new bridge and the CAS, using the Vicar St houses as an excuse to halt the project was/is pathetic. As another poster said, the squandering of money is sad to say the least. I have no problem with locals expressing their disproval of the bridge but I feel they were misled into supporting the retention of those houses at a huge cost.

Sorry, but what exactly is the "huge cost" that has been incurred on these houses? Do you know? If so, are you going to tell us? And if you don't know, how can you say it's "huge"?

Also, please let's not have any crocodile tears from any poster here about Kilkenny County Council "squandering money". Kilkenny County Council squander money all the time. They pay out substantial sums every year to consultants despite having staff of their own. Reckon that money is well spent? Reckon the money spent on those awful maroon street signs was well spent? Reckon the new footbridge was worth €600,000?

The one traffic situation in the city that needs urgent attention is the Kennyswell Road situation, which is truly frightening. That can only be solved by the completion of the ring road. The CAS situation is the reddest of red herrings. The County Council are determined to press ahead with it simply because they can.

Too many people are taking what the Council says at face value and are failing to ask why the CAS is needed. (Including the Kilkenny People, who have been behaving as the Council's PR arm - "Small crowd" indeed!) If you disagree with that statement, then remember this. The Council said the CAS was essential for the old Mart site, an argument that's now obsolete. So why exactly is the CAS needed? Other than because the Council say it is?

kikel

@Mankbag. I actually think the Pedestrian bridge is a great addition to the city and while not the prettiest of things I would actually be in favour of another pedestrian bridge. Put it exactly where they plan to put the CAS bridge.

My main quibble is the bringing of traffic through he city. Their is absolutely no need to bring extra traffic through the city. Only bring traffic that wants to experience the city. i.e shoppers and tourists.

Think the whole situation needs to be looked at from another point of view. How do we get people into the city without adding to the congestion.

Grats

miece16 wrote: »

get it up i say. can't wait for the new road and bridge in the city

Amen to that!

redtelephone

Einhard wrote: »

And yet so many people are against it despite knowing very little about it.

Some people would in principle be against any development in a historically important city centre full stop. They're entitled to hold their opinion just as much as the rest of us. It's the same with pylons, wind turbines politics etc, anyone is entitled to a view without knowing much about the subject. Otherwise we're heading into Taliban territory.

Threadhead

Why are people for it though? That's the question that's never adequately answered. Greens Bridge is definitely in bad shape, no doubt about it but I can't see what the CAS will achieve that completing the ring road won't. I can't see why it's needed.

The Brewery site argument for the CAS is an absolutely ridiculous one too. Sure, it would be great to have another entrance to the site but it's entirely possible to knock the houses on Vicar Street and have a new street that accesses the Brewery site without having to build a bridge alongside it. Knocking the houses, I get. Building this bridge is the baffling part.

kikel

Threadhead wrote: »

Why are people for it though? That's the question that's never adequately answered. Greens Bridge is definitely in bad shape, no doubt about it but I can't see what the CAS will achieve that completing the ring road won't. I can't see why it's needed.

The Brewery site argument for the CAS is an absolutely ridiculous one too. Sure, it would be great to have another entrance to the site but it's entirely possible to knock the houses on Vicar Street and have a new street that accesses the Brewery site without having to build a bridge alongside it. Knocking the houses, I get. Building this bridge is the baffling part.

Well said

obezyana

When is the works due to start? And is the old mart site the big open space beside the army barracks?

Personally I think the works can be a good thing I'm not so sure it will divide the city in two. It might just provide relief from the traffic build up down that way as it can be bad down there at certain times and the old bridge can handle the flow of traffic anymore. Kilkenny is growing it is becoming more and more popular a lot more busier and it needs to move with the times and these works might just help it do that along with the works planned for the Smithwicks site.

I think in a few years time the Ring road will be completed and all of the arguments will be forgotten about as people will then see that the new bridge as with the completed Ring road were needed in order for Kilkenny to progress into a more vibrant busy place where access is easy into and around the town, these works if they both happen within a reasonably short period of time will help with that.

I do agree with the completion of the Ring road but personally at this stage I would lean more to the building of the new bridge.

If the folks in Waterford had the choice of a new bridge they would take it no questions asked as that place has been in dire need for a new bridge for years, I know they have the toll bridge but it's not in the city centre where it's badly needed. The fact that Kilkenny has the option and funds in place to have a new second bridge is a positive move for the town..... Oh how your white and blue neighbours would love that option.

kikel

obezyana wrote: »

When is the works due to start? And is the old mart site the big open space beside the army barracks.

That's the one.


I suppose, to see so many towns and cities trying to remove traffic in a modern day and age than I feel that in years to come we will regret this decision.

Is there an alternative? Do we have to spend this money just because we have been allocated it.

Alternatives:

• complete ring road
• pedestrian brings and promote cycling.
• a bus service for the city
• more car parks near city centre to get people into the main shopping tourist area.

obezyana

kikel wrote: »

That's the one.


I suppose, to see so many towns and cities trying to remove traffic in a modern day and age than I feel that in years to come we will regret this decision.

Is there an alternative? Do we have to spend this money just because we have been allocated it.

Alternatives:

• complete ring road
• pedestrian brings and promote cycling.
• a bus service for the city
• more car parks near city centre to get people into the main shopping tourist area.

.


Unforntunately if they don't spend the money then they won't get future funding as there would be an outlook that says 'well you didn't need it the last time so now you don't need it at all'

Kilkenny is such a nice place to visit and IMHO these works will add to it. I really do believe the Ring road will be completed in a few years time and all will be forgotten about.

Both works do need to happen and I reckon the council know that so they prob feel that the new bridge is the more important one as it ties in with the planned works on the Smithwicks site.

kikel

obezyana wrote: »

.


Unforntunately if they don't spend the money then they won't get future funding as there would be an outlook that says 'well you didn't need it the last time so now you don't need it at all'
.

That type of attitude in the public service really makes my blood boil. Why build sonething just to keep your f'n budget. Build it because it is needed and will make kk a better place to live.

The public service/council really need a change in attitude/thinking.

Threadhead

obezyana wrote: »

.

Both works do need to happen and I reckon the council know that so they prob feel that the new bridge is the more important one as it ties in with the planned works on the Smithwicks site.

This is where I have trouble tying the council's line of argument with what they're actually doing. They say we need the C.A.S. to properly access the Smithwicks site. I disagree. They need to knock the houses on Vicar Street and need to create a new entrance there in order to serve the site. Along with the new Market Yard entrance and the existant entrances, that's the Smithwicks site served. A bridge will do nothing for the Smithwicks site.

There's a line of anti CAS argument that says the Council only want this bridge built to serve what is now a derelict site. A new road might increase interest in buying the site, thus making the council a lot of money. If this were indeed the case (and I can't find much evidence that says otherwise) then we're talking about a huge city altering development for the sake of somebody getting to build a new shopping area in the city. Which, in my opinion, we don't need. The CAS is a Trojan Horse for somebody to make an awful lot of money.

The main argument for CAS is relieving traffic congestion. And again, the ring road solves this.

road_high

The city does need new infrastructure badly but this bridge is ugly and ill designed. I was in favour if it til I saw the pics. Something elegant, yes. Not a concrete block...

mick kk

As regards the new pedestrian bridge - there has been a lot of talk about the bridge that we got, not being the bridge that we were promised i.e. that it doesn't look like the bridge for which planning permission was granted. Does this mean its going to be changed to what it was supposed to look like or are we stuck with what has been built?

If they couldn't get a simple enough pedestrian bridge right, how is the new bridge going to look if it already looks terrible in the plans!

Bowlardo

road_high wrote: »

The city does need new infrastructure badly but this bridge is ugly and ill designed. I was in favour if it til I saw the pics. Something elegant, yes. Not a concrete block...

mick kk wrote: »

If they couldn't get a simple enough pedestrian bridge right, how is the new bridge going to look if it already looks terrible in the plans!

I think if the ring road extended to the Fresh ford road in the short term it would make a considerable difference to the traffic on Greens Bridge in the morning. I think this would take the majority of the heavy vehicles off Greens Bridge.
I can see why the new bridge would be good for developing the old mart site and Wolfe tone street but I have zero confidence in the council constructing a bridge befitting of the medieval city and this is nowhere more evident than the new pedestrian bridge ....it is horrendous. Whoever designed it should be genuinely embarrassed...perhaps there was budget restriction but it is a piss poor attempt - shocking.

catbear

In an unintended way the CAS genral support may be scuppered thanks to the pedestrian bridge!