News

Lies, Deceit and Oblique Bridges

Leave a comment

October 16th 2015  : The CAS bridge – A truly ugly creation

Now  that the full monstrosity that is the Kilkenny Central Access Scheme bridge, has been unleashed on us, one particularly ugly  aspect stands out. Why does it cross the Nore at an oblique angle (ie. not at a right angle to the river bank, like all the other bridges in ye faire city?)

casrotary

Above is an image of the CAS bridge as presented by Mr John Mulholland to the Kilkenny Rotary Club 28th July 2014. Note the pronounced bend in the road. Note also the building arrowed yellow. At the time of planning approval, the City of Kilkenny had not yet acquired the former Diageo site and so the CAS was planned to go around this building. Hence the bridge had to cross the Nore at an oblique angle (as if it was n’t bad enough to have a motorway style bridge in the middle of medieval Kilkenny).  Here is what a straight right angle crossing would look like.

casbridge-straight

So where is this precious Diageo building now ? Completely demolished. So now we have a road bridge that bends around nothing but rubble. So would n’t you think when news of the Diageo bequest came to light, that the CAS planners and Council would review the design? Of course the speed at which the CAS phase 1 was rushed through the council in May/June 2014 says enough. With mounting opposition they were afraid of their lives the project would stall.

Deceit

During the course of the planning, Kilkenny County Council have produced many images of a propaganda nature that would make Joseph Goebbels blush. Here is one such image much beloved by the Pro-Cas fraternity:

subpic

Look at that humped bridge go ! Humped bridge ? Surely not the CAS bridge? Look at it in close up:

subpiccrop

Now have a look at what the emerging CAS bridge really looks like :

20151016_153220

Yep. That’s more like it. As flat as a pancake.

The same deceit was passed off when the first images of the meccano bridge emerged (sorry I mean the Lady Desart bridge).

Before (that’s quite a curve):

legobridge1

Reality (much slighter curve) :

legobridge2

Another image of the emerging CAS bridge.

20151016_153429

And lest we forget what the Peace Park once looked like

PeacePark2

PeacePark-1

Blog Page

Proud to be a Kilkenny Cat !

Leave a comment

April 14th 2015

About 8/9 months ago, give or take; Kilkenny county council threatened protesters at the KCAS instream works site with injunctions; today Kilkenny county council have agreed to change the manner in which they (regretfully) continue to build the hated KCAS because these same protesters got organised- raised money- from busking to skills auctions, cake sales, car boot, jumble sales and donations- and injuncted kkcoco! Today kkcoco have agreed to pay costs and work in a more environmentally friendly manner; that is, from the river bank. They have been held accountable- not by our councillors but by ordinary local people; especial thanks to Chris who had the guts to take this case. I would like to hear the council reassure the people of Kilkenny that no significant adverse impacts to this cSAC river have happened. I hope our councillors do likewise. Never more proud to be a Kilkenny cat!

P.  Ó’Ceallaigh.

News

Agreement reached on CAS Bridge High Court Case

Leave a comment

14th April 2015

Press Release from Mr. Christopher O’Keeffe

Christopher O’Keeffe v Kilkenny County Council: Settlement of High Court Proceedings.

Christopher O’Keeffe welcomes the settlement of High Court Proceedings surrounding the Kilkenny Central Access Scheme Bridge and the Ossory Pedestrian Bridge. The settlement provides confirmation that:
1. Kilkenny County Council will work in compliance with permissions, specifically using long reach machinery from the bank of the river.
2. The nature of this case was in the Public Interest.

On the 14th April, 2015 the High Court Ordered in respect of this case;
“The Defendant shall pay the sum of €50,000 and VAT thereon @ 23% (€11,500), being a total of €61,500 by way of contribution to the costs of the Plaintiff (to include professional fees, outlays or otherwise) within four weeks of the execution of these terms of settlement.”

Christopher O’Keeffe notes that the terms of Settlement make specific reference to the original Panning conditions laid down by An Bord Pleanala and further to section 5 of the submission made by Kilkenny County Council dated the 15th day of December 2014;

“The Defendant continuing to construct the development, the subject of An Bord Pleanala Ref 10.HA0014, in accordance with the modified plans and particulars for the Central Access Scheme for the City of Kilkenny, as submitted to An Bord Pleanala on the 31st day of January 2011 and the mitigation measures (encompassing the environmental commitments) set out in the revised Environmental Impact Statement (January 2011) also submitted on the same date and in further accordance with the submission to An Bord Pleanala by the Defendant dated the 15th day of December 2014, except as may otherwise be required in order to comply with conditions 2 to 4 of the An Bord Pleanala Approval 10HA.0014”;

In agreeing to this settlement Christopher O’Keeffe has acquired the High Court sanctioned undertaking that he sought from the outset, and that forced him to take this action. Kilkenny County Council will now work from the riverbank, using long reach machinery, in order to mitigate environmental damage. In the Order of costs the Court acknowledges the public interest and environmental protective nature of this case.

The settlement negates the need for a lengthy and costly High Court hearing, saving the people of Kilkenny considerable monies, in the event that Kilkenny County Council lost this case in the High Court, particularly where Kilkenny County Council made a choice to force the most expensive form of hearing.

Mr O’Keeffe regrets, that despite his best efforts, it was not possible to establish this method of working, as the accepted one, much earlier in these proceedings, thus avoiding all costs. He further regrets that there is currently no other avenue for citizens to pursue, in situations such as this, other than costly court actions, as there is no Ombudsman or Regulator in place that can deal with such concerns in a timely and cost neutral manner.