M28 - Cork to Ringaskiddy [advance works pending; 2024 start]

marno21

Here's the full text of the exchange between the TII CEO and Jerry Buttimer

Peter Walsh: I will illustrate my answer to the question on what a fairer process would be with an example of an issue that has been a frustration. I am not pointing fingers at anybody. The N28 Cork to Ringaskiddy scheme was submitted to An Bord Pleanála on 15 May 2017. It passed each test and was approved by An Bord Pleanála in July 2018. It has been through various judicial review challenges and we still do not have an outcome. We may not have one by May 2021. There has been no finding of any substance. Nobody can point to anything that Cork County Council did wrong on the project. I can only assume that the length of time the process is taking arises from the capacity of the courts to deal with the issues. It may well be that there is a resourcing issue there that should be addressed, although that is probably not for me to say. I am not suggesting that people's rights should be in any way curtailed. If any substantive issue had been raised, any resultant delay would be fair enough, but no such issue has been raised.

Senator Jerry Buttimer
As a member of the N28 group, may I make the point that if TII had engaged meaningfully on the first day, we would not be where we are today. I am not seeking to have an argument, but let us be fair. The residents of the area were trampled on. If there had been proper engagement, the problems could have been avoided. The majority of people in the area were not against the road but they were against the way in which they were treated, to be fair.

Mr. Peter Walsh
I accept the Deputy's point. I am just saying that I thought

---

Chairman
Perhaps Mr. Walsh can come back to the Senator on that issue. Senator Buttimer should

---

Mr. Peter Walsh

---

it might help if I illustrated my answer with an example.

Senator Jerry Buttimer
I apologise for interrupting. I was involved with those residents. The majority of them were not against the road but they were against the way in which they were treated. For the information of the Chairman, I am in Leinster House.

Chairman
The Senator can come back in with further thoughts on the matter at the end of the meeting. We will allow a little extra time for Deputy Ó Murchú to finish his contribution.

Senator Jerry Buttimer
I apologise for interrupting Deputy Ó Murchú.

marno21

danny004 wrote: »

Dont fool yourself in admiring them ,remember they first published the initial design in 2005 and it took them until 2017 to bring it to ABP so working at breakneck speed isnt exactly their forte either

The project received limited funding from 2005 til 2011, was suspended in 2011 and only reactivated in late 2013.

They got the project from a standing start in late 2013 to ABP submission in 2017 which is quite fast going by recent standards (the Adare bypass took 5 years for this, the Galway Ring Road took 4 years or so).

The reason this isn't proceeding at breakneck speed is because, according to a Senator above, the project is being appealed to the maximum extent legally possible because local residents are in favour of the road but don't like being trampled on.

Hibernicis

marno21 wrote: »

TII were in front of the Oireachtas Transport Committee today where the delays on progressing the M28 were highlighted.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts-congestion-blamed-for-road-project-delays-40042976.html

Completely correct that this has now spent 45 months in the planning system with no evidence presented yet that there is any issues with the scheme as submitted. Crazy stuff.

The claptrap that some of these politicians come out with is deeply offensive to the professionalism of the majority of public servants involved in these projects. Lets take both of the politicians statements contained in that article:

Fine Gael Senator Jerry Buttimer said the process might have gone more smoothly if TII had “engaged meaningfully” with local residents. “The residents in the area were trampled on,” he said. “The majority of people were not against the road but were against the way they were treated.”

Sinn Fein TD Ruairí Ó Murchú, who queried progress on the Ardee bypass for which designs were first drawn in 1999, said there was a “take it or leave it” attitude to local people who sought amendments to projects. “There needs to be an ability to get small factors changed fast and to ensure that a project isn’t held up,” he said.

Both of these (and many similar statements we have had from politicians over the years regarding infrastructure projects) are factually incorrect and utter nonsense.

Let's delve deeper:

There was an extensive consultation process in the years prior to the M28 project being submitted to An Bord Pleanala. The following is a brief summary taken from the report on the M28 public consultation. This took place as a legally necessary part of the EIA

The initial Public Consultation ran from the 4th April 2016 to the 13th May 2016 (Covered in pages 1-32 of the report on the M28 public consultation) and included

• In recognition of the mandate given to elected representatives and the critical role they play in representing the public and the public interest, Cork County Council Elected Representatives were briefed on the proposals on 16th October 2015 at County Hall.
  
• Information on the proposed project was published online on the project website www.n28cork‐ringaskiddy.com.
• A public open day was held on Monday 9th November at the Maryborough Hotel. Members of the project team were available to provide information on the proposals to over 600 public consultees.

Over 600 people attended the initial public consultation which took place in the Maryborough Hotel on Monday 9th November 2015 from 4.00pm to 8.00pm. The Consultation report captures the feedback received by the Project Team. This feedback resulted in extensive changes to the proposals which, off the top of my head, these included (1) the decision to retain and bring up to standard the Mount Oval off ramp (2) enhancements to the upgraded N28/Rochestown Road interchange (3) significant enhancement to the Rochestown Road/Clarks Hill junction (4) a total redesign of the M28 /Carrs Hill interchange (5) the elimination of the Maryborough Ridge link road (6) I’m sure that there are others that I don’t recall

There was a further round of public consultation the following year (covered on pages 33 onwards) including a set of Public Presentations on Monday 4th April 2016 from 2pm to 8pm in the Maryborough Hotel and on Tuesday 5th April 2016 in the Carrigaline Court Hotel. The purpose of these was to present the revised plans which were actually well received at the time, and don’t just take my word for it:

Local councillors Mary Rose Desmond and Seamus McGrath, who both attended the exhibition, said they had received positive feedback from residents who were concerned about the initial plan.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20391146.html

As well as the general public, the following Public Bodies were consulted (as is required when preparing the EIA)

1. BAT CONSERVATION IRELAND
2. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS, ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
3. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS UNIT
4. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
5. ESB NETWORKS
6. FAILTE IRELAND
7. GAS NETWORKS IRELAND
8. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF IRELAND
9. HEALTH SERVICE EXECUTIVE
10. INLAND FISHERIES IRELAND
11. NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
12. OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS
13. SOUTH WEST RIVER BASIN DISTRICT

There was a further Public Presentation of the final plan (immediately prior to its submission to An Bord Pleanala) which took place on Tuesday 11th April 2017 in the Carrigaline Court Hotel from 2pm – 8pm

And then there were the extensive Oral Hearings during the Bord Pleanala process, at which the M28 Steering Group had ample opportunity to express their views (and took more than a few days to do so) and were at the time very very very proud of the evidence they presented.

So as far as Butimer's comments are concerned, it appears to me that there was ample opportunity for the local residents to engage meaningfully (I certainly did). I can see no evidence whatsoever that anybody was trampled on. And I certainly don't feel that I was unfairly or inappropriately treated. And regarding Ó Murchú's comments, the above process can hardly be regarded as a “take it or leave it” attitude, there were numerous "small (and not so small) factors changed fast" (sic) and the change the M28 Steering Group wish for is far from small or fast (i.e the re routing or abandonment of the entire project).

I appreciate that Buttimer is regarded with particular distaste in these parts, but frankly the rest are no better, perhaps just a lot more nuanced (i.e. better at speaking out of both sides of their mouths). Not one of them, councillors or TDs, has championed this project, got behind it or attempted to promote it. I particularly remember one clanger from the right hand side of the McGrath brain (Cllr Seamus) in 2017 when he "urged An Bord Pleanála not to rush into any decision on the M28.... I fully accept there needs to be an upgrade to the road network linking Ringaskiddy and Carrigaline to the N40 but having said that there is time to go back to the drawing board because .... that gives us time to reassess the design and come up with something that has less of an impact on communities and residents.” (Bearing in mind that this would take us back to the start of the project in 2002.) And the rest, Martin, Desmond, Coveney etc are every bit as bad, leading from behind wherever they think the voters are headed. As I'v said before, although I very much disagree with her on this subject, the only one who has anything resembling a principled stance (and who actually knows what she is talking about) is Marcia D'Alton.

Finally, in relation to the rubbish about a lack of consultation, take the M28 Steering Group’s often quoted gripe that “we have a much better route but nobody will listen to us” - that is dispelled by Section 3 : REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES EXAMINED of M28 Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1: Non-Technical Summary (Pages 8 & 9) which explains why the alternative routes leading to the Bandon Road Interchange, the Sarsfield Road Interchange and the Kinsale Road interchange were eliminated.

If anybody deserves to be consulted further it's the 20,000 drivers who suffer the N28 on a daily basis. Those are the ones who are actually being trampled on.

Hibernicis

marno21 wrote: »

The project received limited funding from 2005 til 2011, was suspended in 2011 and only reactivated in late 2013.

They got the project from a standing start in late 2013 to ABP submission in 2017 which is quite fast going by recent standards (the Adare bypass took 5 years for this, the Galway Ring Road took 4 years or so).

The reason this isn't proceeding at breakneck speed is because, according to a Senator above, the project is being appealed to the maximum extent legally possible because local residents are in favour of the road but don't like being trampled on.

Just to depress you, it actually stretches back further:

from the M28 Route Selection Report section 1.1, pdf physical page 11

Cork County Council has carried out studies relating to the improvement of the N28 since 2002. A summary of the previous studies is listed below;
 Draft Constraints Study by Atkins, Dec 2002
 Draft Route Selection Report by Cork County Council, Dec 2004, amended March 2006.
 Draft Addendum to Route Selection Report by Halcrow Barry, Oct 2008
 Draft Preliminary Design Report by Halcrow Barry, Oct 2008
 Draft Environmental Impact Statement by Halcrow Barry, July 2009
 Draft Business Case Report by Halcrow Barry, Dec 2010
 Draft Cost Benefit Analysis by Halcrow Barry, Oct 2013.

Hibernicis

Where to from here ?

Assuming that the petition was actually lodged on the 6th Jan 2021 as stated previously, and assuming that they notified the Respondent (An Bord Pleanala) and the Notice Party (Cork County Council who also represent TII) on the same day as they are required to do, then the thing should move along like this:

An Bord Pleanala and Cork County Council have 21 days from 6th January to respond
Some further paper work gets done
The petition is listed for hearing before a panel of 3 Judges of the Supreme Court. These hearings take place frequently (usually weekly) and are in chambers (no public/press). They will consider the petition and will usually reach a determination quickly. One of the judges will write it up and it will be published.

The process is designed to be as efficient as possible – the applicants state their grounds for applying and set out how they satisfy either or both of the following requirements: (i) the decision involves a matter of general public importance; and/or (ii) the interests of justice and have a maximum of two pages to do so. The other side respond/rebut. The panel of Judges considers this and can of course reference any prior documents (from the High Court and other related cases/applications). The panel reach a decision and one of the judges writes up their decision and the determination is published. The majority of these applications are dealt with in 6-8 weeks, so the previously stated expectation that we will know by the end of April whether or not the case is going to the Supreme Court appears reasonable.


The first indication we will have is when the application is listed here for consideration. You need only watch the top entry. The application will be listed under one of the “Panel meeting for consideration of applications received seeking leave to appeal under Article 34.5.3º and Article 34.5.4º of the Constitution (In Chambers).” This is a rolling document and is updated daily. These Panel meetings take place most weeks, the next scheduled ones being:

4th February 2021 (including the very first appearance by Mr. Justice Woulfe)
12th February 2021 (two panels scheduled)
19th February 2021
24th February 2021
5th March 2021

That’s the good news. However in the event that the case is accepted by the Supreme Court then it is very difficult to determine how long it could go on, but 12-24 months isn’t beyond the bounds of possibility. Unfortunately. But let’s not worry about that yet, and remain optimistic.

AugustusMinimus

Some of the most disingenuous comments I’ve seen from Buttimer yet.

- There is no such feeling on the ground about TII’s treatment of the populace. People want this road and I haven’t heard a thing about how the authorities are handling the situation
- as others have said, there have been open consultations with the public. I attended one at Maryborough House Hotel and the reps from TII were excellent and forthcoming.
- As others have said, the Steering group have put out nothing but hyperbole and lies. Yet politicians and the media alike will not say a word about them

Overall, Buttimer is in a sticky place here. He backed the Steering Group and now realised he backed the wrong horse. This is a slimey attempt to get out of a hole.

danny004

marno21 wrote: »

The project received limited funding from 2005 til 2011, was suspended in 2011 and only reactivated in late 2013.

They got the project from a standing start in late 2013 to ABP submission in 2017 which is quite fast going by recent standards (the Adare bypass took 5 years for this, the Galway Ring Road took 4 years or so).

The reason this isn't proceeding at breakneck speed is because, according to a Senator above, the project is being appealed to the maximum extent legally possible because local residents are in favour of the road but don't like being trampled on.

To be fair now though it wasn't from a standing start they had 6 years of pre work via halcorw barry so even excluding the two years of inactivity thats 10 years to get to planning for circa 16km through mostly green field so they are not completely blamless

Cookiemunster

danny004 wrote: »

To be fair now though it wasn't from a standing start they had 6 years of pre work via halcorw barry so even excluding the two years of inactivity thats 10 years to get to planning for circa 16km through mostly green field so they are not completely blamless

Did they? Or like the M20 was all the previous work thrown out so the had to start form scratch?

danny004

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Did they? Or like the M20 was all the previous work thrown out so the had to start form scratch?

Well if they had to throw it all out thats even worse that they wasted tax payers money for years with nothing to show but lost time.
Im not saying the current judicial system is correct far from it and share the frustration but what I am saying is in the whole lifecycle of this project from concept to actually a car on the road which will stretch from early to mid 2000s to 2027 is not all just down to the M28 steering group.

marno21

danny004 wrote: »

Well if they had to throw it all out thats even worse that they wasted tax payers money for years with nothing to show but lost time.
Im not saying the current judicial system is correct far from it and share the frustration but what I am saying is in the whole lifecycle of this project from concept to actually a car on the road which will stretch from early to mid 2000s to 2027 is not all just down to the M28 steering group.

They did have to throw it all out unfortunately. The project had to be restarted from scratch to comply with changes in the Public Spending Code. There’s approximately 25 projects in planning at the minute which had to restart from scratch even though there was substantial work done on them in the past (M28, M20, Carrigtwohill-Midleton and the North Ring are some Cork examples)

danny004

so all of the technical design ,the preferred route selection which was complete ,the preliminary surveys around properties ,height measurements etc all had to be thrown out and redone.
I can tell you for an absolute fact none of that was thrown out and restarted.

Pete_Cavan

It's not a case of "throwing things out" but clearly things change over the course of a decade so have to be updated at the very least to ensure that what they are doing now is based on current reality and current future projections. You can't design a road now, or even 8 years ago, based on surveys or economic data from the early 2000s which is horrendously out of date.

prunudo

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

It's not a case of "throwing things out" but clearly things change over the course of a decade so have to be updated at the very least to ensure that what they are doing now is based on current reality and current future projections. You can't design a road now, or even 8 years ago, based on surveys or economic data from the early 2000s which is horrendously out of date.

Exactly, imagine the outcry on here or by the public if it turned out they designed a road or any infrastructure for that matter, using out of date data.

Treehelpplease

will the city council become invovled in this now since 5km of the project is in the city?

marno21

Treehelpplease wrote: »

will the city council become invovled in this now since 5km of the project is in the city?

No such an issue would be dealt with through a Section 85 agreement.

Treehelpplease

marno21 wrote: »

No such an issue would be dealt with through a Section 85 agreement.

Sorry for the ignorance but what is that?

marno21

Treehelpplease wrote: »

Sorry for the ignorance but what is that?

No problem at all. It’s where one local authority delegates, in this instance, to another local authority permission to complete a road development that falls within their local authority area.

Here’s the Section 85 agreement between Limerick and Cork councils for the M20 (Limerick City and County Council are the lead authority on that job)

https://www.limerick.ie/sites/default/files/media/documents/2018-05/05%20%28a%29%20NM20%20Cork%20to%20Limerick%20Road%20Improvement%20Scheme%20-%20Section%2085%20Agreement%20with%20Cork%20County%20Council.pdf

mikeym

I see Janeville is stretching out towards the Shannon Park Roundabout, Houses are being built on land that was for the M28.

Or has the route being rerouted?

Cookiemunster

mikeym wrote: »

I see Janeville is stretching out towards the Shannon Park Roundabout, Houses are being built on land that was for the M28.

Or has the route being rerouted?

Nothing can be built on the land reserved for this route.

mikeym

Another Housing development is being built around the M28 outside Carrigaline.

https://assets.savills.com/properties/E820CFC4-05C8-4242-A171-29C5F28F3CC6/Shannon%20Park%20Final.pdf

markodaly

mikeym wrote: »

Another Housing development is being built around the M28 outside Carrigaline.

https://assets.savills.com/properties/E820CFC4-05C8-4242-A171-29C5F28F3CC6/Shannon%20Park%20Final.pdf

That is a land sale brochure, nothing there about planning permission for houses.

markodaly

mikeym wrote: »

I see Janeville is stretching out towards the Shannon Park Roundabout, Houses are being built on land that was for the M28.

Or has the route being rerouted?

That isn't true afaik.

Scooby Reggie do

Looks like houses are built right next to the Shannon Park roundabout alright where the motorway was planned to go

Cookiemunster

Scooby Reggie do wrote: »

Looks like houses are built right next to the Shannon Park roundabout alright where the motorway was planned to go

It there are houses built there, then the motorway wasn't planned to go there. The project has full planning permission, so nothing can be built along the chosen route.

Limerick74

Cookiemunster wrote: »

It there are houses built there, then the motorway wasn't planned to go there. The project has full planning permission, so nothing can be built along the chosen route.

Was this the location where ABP overruled Cork County’s objection that this would impact on M28 scheme or be right next to the future road?

Scooby Reggie do

Looked at drawings again on corkrdo.ie and the road is running closer to the existing shannonpark roundabout than I thought originally. Fairly tight though.

Cork Trucker

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/arid-40222313.html

The M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy route has had planning approved, but due to objectors who have sought leave to appeal to Supreme Court, the council does not have approval to proceed to construction while the case is ongoing

Hibernicis

Cork Trucker wrote: »

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/arid-40222313.html

The M28 Cork to Ringaskiddy route has had planning approved, but due to objectors who have sought leave to appeal to Supreme Court, the council does not have approval to proceed to construction while the case is ongoing

This is either very badly worded or totally incorrect.

Seeking leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court (or the Court of Appeal) does NOT act as a stay on execution:

Superior Court Rules, Order 58 (Proceedings in the Supreme Court)

Application for leave or appeal not to operate as a stay

10. (1) An application for leave or an appeal to the Supreme Court does not operate as a stay of execution or of proceedings under the decision appealed from, except so far as the Court of Appeal or (as the case may be) the High Court orders.

The High Court judgment issued by MacGrath J. does not mention a stay on execution pending appeal. And there has been no mention of an injunction at any point.

The only other interpretation of this is that Cork County Council does not have approval to proceed from TII. Thats a decision which TII could make to avoid the risk of expenditure going to waste in the event that the Supreme Court appeal was allowed to proceed and was ultimately upheld.

Hibernicis

marno21 wrote: »

Treehelpplease wrote: »

will the city council become invovled in this now since 5km of the project is in the city?

No such an issue would be dealt with through a Section 85 agreement.

In addition to the Section 85 agreement mentioned by marno21 it's worth mentioning that the two councils prepared an implementation plan which set out the principle, methodologies and timetable for the transfer. Road projects are mentioned in this.

Roads Capital Projects
There are a number of capital projects within the relevant area. Each project will be evaluated individually on a case by case basis and one of the following delivery mechanisms used to complete the delivery of the project:

1. Cork County Council will finish out the project and hand over the completed infrastructure to Cork City Council for maintenance and operation once construction is completed.
2. Cork City Council as part of the transition will take over the delivery of the project which will be delivered as per the existing project plans.

For the most part, projects are expected to be at or near natural break points (e.g. completion of Part 8 planning process or completion of detailed design or tender). It has been agreed that if construction of a scheme has commenced that it would be best for the County to continue to close it out and hand over the completed infrastructure to the City Council. Critical to all of the decisions made with regard to capital projects and deciding how they can best be transferred to the City Council is to ensure that this is achieved without loss of momentum on the project.

While this does not directly impact the M28 project, the related project to upgrade Clarks Hill / Rochestown Road was transferred entirely from the County Council to the City Council.

Hibernicis

Scooby Reggie do wrote: »

Looked at drawings again on corkrdo.ie and the road is running closer to the existing shannonpark roundabout than I thought originally. Fairly tight though.

Very tight indeed. The diagram on page 3 of the Savills brochure which markodaly linked to in post #1102 makes it clear what is happening:

The existing N28 is at the top of the diagram
The bottom two thirds of the red rectangle (below the broken line) show the land zoned for housing development
The top one third of the red rectangle (above the broken line) is situated in the metropolitan green belt
The dotted lines show the land reserved for the M28

From this it is obvious that the M28 is close to the existing N28, and that the houses could be extremely close to the M28 if they are built to the edge of the land zoned for residential development.

Projecting the dotted lines further west, it becomes clear just how close the Northern end of Janeville will be to the M28