Should the M28 Cork-Ringaskiddy motorway be built? [project approved]

marno21

As legal proceedings are now active, I have temporarily closed this thread to ensure that discussion is now allowed.

I will update this post when I know.

marno21

marno21 wrote: »

As legal proceedings are now active, I have temporarily closed this thread to ensure that discussion is now allowed.

I will update this post when I know.

Thread reopened with added Irish Times reporting: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/residents-begin-high-court-challenge-against-m28-development-1.3609539

Please think before you post, especially in relation to people involved, and bearing in mind that this is an active legal case (although hopefully a pretty short lived one).

AugustusMinimus

Do we have a likely timescale for when this will be heard by the high court?

Cork Trucker

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Do we have a likely timescale for when this will be heard by the high court?

+1 on this.

When It is before the court again later this week is it to set a date or what is the procedure?

I'd be amazed if they came up with the €200k though.

MrDerp

The article says the matter is adjourned until later this week, but according to the courts website the high court doesn't sit again until 1st October (for it's 'Michalmas' sitting).

Pure guess work, but I'm thinking there's procedural stuff goes on in the interim - they probably got an acknowledgement of papers being lodged yesterday, they'll be told if everything is in order by the end of the week and they'll get a date for a judge to decide on if there's grounds for a judicial review. Since the high court hasn't sat since the end of July, it's reasonably to assume there's plenty of cases loaded up. I wouldn't expect a decision on whether they can proceed before November/December. This may not even be reviewed until the new year.

Here's an example of a case where a wind-farm builder tried to get a judicial review into an ABP decision:
1. They lodged papers for a judicial review on August 28th 2017.
https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/forestry-enviro/high-court-challenge-launched-after-wind-farm-refused-planning-36079657.html
"Permission to bring the challenge was granted on an ex parte basis, where only side was present in court, by Ms Justice Mary Faherty. The judge made the matter returnable to a date in October."

2. It was only in March 2018 that an over-turn was denied
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/energy-and-resources/wind-farm-operator-loses-challenge-to-meath-permission-refusal-1.3418446
http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/e942e2b64fdcf4fe8025824e005251d7?OpenDocument
"This is a judicial review by the applicant, North Meath Wind Farm Limited (which is joined as a co-applicant by its shareholder, Element Power Ireland Limited), of a decision of An Bord Pleanála (“the Board”) on 30th June, 2017"

I'm guessing from the above that they lodged papers in August, were granted a judicial review in October/November, and were told to sling their hook in March.

So I'd expect, if the paperwork is in order (and there's no reason to suspect it isn't) that a judge will briefly hear this later in the week and 'make the matter returnable' during the next sitting of the high court (October - December). I would hope they're told to sling their hook then, but if they are awarded a judicial review, it may be March before the matter is resolved.

They will be free to go to the supreme court, but they will be getting out the begging bowl in a big way then.

On the 200K, I expect they will need to up the retainer for their counsel to continue with proceedings. Again, guesswork, but I'd expect they've a bit longer to raise funds before their representation pull the plug on the proceedings - "we need a balance by X date or you will need to withdraw / seek other representation", or personal guarantees.

Cork Trucker

So this might drag on until April or May of next year possibly longer?

Can the NTA/TII proceed with their side of things even while this is all going on or does it put the brakes on it for now?

What is unusual though is how quiet they are at present, is this legal instruction?

prunudo

Cork Trucker wrote: »

So this might drag on until April or May of next year possibly longer?

Can the NTA/TII proceed with their side of things even while this is all going on or does it put the brakes on it for now?

What is unusual though is how quiet they are at present, is this legal instruction?

They really need to come up with a quicker way for people to air their grievances. Stalling major infrastructure projects for months or years in the courts which have already gone through the proper channels isn't on.
While I don't want to live in a dictatorship and except people have a right to complain. The whole appeals process needs to be streamlined.

marno21

The objectors claim they weren't listened to yet the ABP decision was delayed by 6 months in order to comprehensively address the objectors submissions

This project was submitted to ABP in May 2017. It's taking far far too long to sort these decisions

sondagefaux

Aontachtoir wrote: »

Cork Trucker wrote: »

They said they'll take it to Europe. How long will that take? about another 7 years from now to then?

Don't know to be honest. It can take years. The €13bn Apple tax finding was appealed back in 2016 and isn't due to be heard for another two to three years I believe.

My layperson understanding is that the Steering Group need High Court permission to appeal to Luxembourg. I don't know what type of bar has to be reached to get that permission.

Let's hope the High Court shut them down, but if they have a pet barrister working for free then I don't see what's stopping them appealing every last step, over and over all the way to the Supreme Court and then on to Europe.

You can't appeal decisions of national courts to the ECJ. What you can do is ask the national courts to refer questions about EU law (and national law which implements EU law) to the ECJ. The procedure is completely different to making an appeal to a higher court. The national courts must agree to refer questions about EU law to the ECJ. If they don't agree, the process remains within the national courts system. If the objectors to the M28 can't persuade an Irish court to refer a question or questions about EU law to the ECJ, the furthest the process can go is the highest Irish court.

Aontachtoir

sondagefaux wrote: »

You can't appeal decisions of national courts to the ECJ. What you can do is ask the national courts to refer questions about EU law (and national law which implements EU law) to the ECJ. The procedure is completely different to making an appeal to a higher court. The national courts must agree to refer questions about EU law to the ECJ. If they don't agree, the process remains within the national courts system. If the objectors to the M28 can't persuade an Irish court to refer a question or questions about EU law to the ECJ, the furthest the process can go is the highest Irish court.

Good to know, thanks for the clarification. A small comfort for the long, long stream of pointless, time-wasting appeals ahead of us.

Lackey

Cork Trucker wrote: »

They said they'll take it to Europe. How long will that take? about another 7 years from now to then?

In 1993 the planning application process began to build sewage treatment plant in Arklow,

its 2018..... 25 years on... raw sewage and human waste is still pumped into the river due to one or two peoples objections.


You'll be lucky if its 7 years.

ianobrien

Thats grand. The people trying to travel in and out of Ringaskiddy, Carragaline and further afield have another year or longer of sitting in traffic.

How much will that cost in economic terms? Imagine the wages paid to delivery drivers for sitting in traffic needlessly.

marno21

The M28 will yield a transport benefit of €316m in its first 30 years of operation. (conservative estimate)

It'll generate financial benefits of €97m per year due to increased capacity growing employment in the Ringaskiddy (based on assumption of 1,100 extra jobs in the area)

Not building the M28 and enabling the Port to run at full capacity will cost the region €59bn in lost trade over 30 years.

This is from the Indecon report published in 2010, available here https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68187755&postcount=18

These figures are out of date but I don't believe there are more recent ones published.

mikeym

marno21 wrote: »

Thread reopened with added Irish Times reporting: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/residents-begin-high-court-challenge-against-m28-development-1.3609539

Please think before you post, especially in relation to people involved, and bearing in mind that this is an active legal case (although hopefully a pretty short lived one).

Ridiculous.

Clutching at straws they are :mad:

Carsanal

Course it should! Well needed

kub

ianobrien wrote:

Thats grand. The people trying to travel in and out of Ringaskiddy, Carragaline and further afield have another year or longer of sitting in traffic.

ianobrien wrote:

How much will that cost in economic terms? Imagine the wages paid to delivery drivers for sitting in traffic needlessly.

Not to mention of course " All the fumes and pollution" caused by traffic sitting stationary on the N28.

I reckon we could take every misinformed post, lie, dramatisation and bluff they have ever posted and now put them all down as fact with the existing road as it is currently.

Kermit.de.frog

But, to be fair, trucks could blow up on the road putting their lives in danger.

corks finest

If course

marno21

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

But, to be fair, trucks could blow up on the road putting their lives in danger.

Yes, and there's no increase in the probability of this when the motorway opens vs the existing road. At least when the new road opens it has more access points in the Rochestown area, and the motorway would be safer in the event of an accident, in addition to less traffic congestion on it.

As an aside, how has the M50/N40/M1/N4/N7 and other such urban motorways contributed to deaths in Ireland from exploding HGVs?

kub

Kermit.de.frog wrote:

But, to be fair, trucks could blow up on the road putting their lives in danger.

Engines overheating while stuck in traffic jams

marno21

Cork Trucker

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

But, to be fair, trucks could blow up on the road putting their lives in danger.

Ah here :rolleyes:


My truck is up and down that road 5 days a week, with chemicals on board, I drive a 40ft artic, never seen exploding or burning trucks, just 1 incident where the driver got his qualifications out of a lucky bag, and yes I do know him personally.

Not having this road is actually problematical for trucks as well.

Higher diesel consumption, servicing costs etc.


In 2015 my 4 year old truck with 500k on the clock had to go for a full engine rebuild as the block was cracked.

Have had a few punctures or blowouts.

But sure lets all jump on the band wagon and blame the truckers, oh praise the fcuking lord :rolleyes:

I know you were sarcastic Kermit.

I'm referring to our beloved opposition.

Cork Trucker

marno21 wrote: »

They've become eco warriors :pac:

MrDerp

So it looks like we won't see an update on this until September 19th
http://highcourtsearch.courts.ie/hcslive/court_lists.show?sessionID=74768790&yearNo=2018&recordNo=708&processType=JR

The matter is before Justice Barniville. It appears this judge has been appointed to exclusively handle infrastructure judicial review applications and speed things up.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/judge-assigned-to-deal-with-infrastructure-project-challenges-1.3383337
I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing. You'd always hope for a no-nonsense judge in these cases. Barniville is less than a year in the job, he may be firm or soft, who knows.
So far we know he granted the review for the Cork Harbour incinerator, and pushed the St Anne's park housing development back.

Cork Trucker

MrDerp wrote: »

So it looks like we won't see an update on this until September 19th
http://highcourtsearch.courts.ie/hcslive/court_lists.show?sessionID=74768790&yearNo=2018&recordNo=708&processType=JR

This is coming back as 'expired session'

marno21

Cork Trucker wrote: »

This is coming back as 'expired session'

If you search using parameters 2018 and JR - Judicial Review, scroll down to M28 Steering Group vs An Bord Pleanala you'll find it.

Direct links can't be copied as they are session tied.

Kermit.de.frog

Will this classify as an "urban motorway"? (if so of course it should be at least 5 lanes each way but that's neither here nor there). Speed limit will be 100 km/h?

AugustusMinimus

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Will this classify as an "urban motorway"? (if so of course it should be at least 5 lanes each way but that's neither here nor there). Speed limit will be 100 km/h?

Minimum 8 lanes in my view. Let’s future proof.

Geogregor

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Will this classify as an "urban motorway"? (if so of course it should be at least 5 lanes each way but that's neither here nor there). Speed limit will be 100 km/h?

Maybe 10 lanes in each direction? 
Come on, what for? It is going to be short spur to the harbour, not a major interurban.

marno21

MOD:

The M28 Cork-Ringaskiddy motorway scheme has been submitted to An Bord Pleanala as a D2M. There was no mention of any additional lanes, and this plan will not change as long as the current scheme is progressing. We already know what the M28 will look like when built, so please don't go back to the drawing board regarding unneeded extra lanes