Register to Comment
Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 157
Like Tree27Likes
  1. #41
    sic transit sic transit is offline
    sic transit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    23,276

    Quote Originally Posted by Thekinghasnoclothes View Post
    None

    Perhaps a self cleaning glass wall ?
    And this is really the problem. They don't have any alternative beyond insisting there must be alternatives. No-one would have issue with residents raising valid objections but as the site itself also points out this was first talked about in 2005.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #42
    Potatoeman Potatoeman is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,888

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveM View Post
    Bottom line is the only alternative to localised flood defences is a scheme to protect the greater Dublin Bay area. You'd probably be looking at sea walls enclosing the bay with something akin to the Thames Barrier providing access. In the long term if sea levels do rise we're probably going to have to contemplate something like this but that is decades away. Money wise comparing such as scheme to what is proposed here is like trying to decide whether you want to buy a packet of Tayto or a Porsche.
    The flip side to that is the population concentration in the Dublin area. There are not that many green spaces and Clontarf is one of the few that is well kept and would be considered safe. It's particularly popular for women as it’s safer than most parks in the city.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #43
    Thekinghasnoclothes Thekinghasnoclothes is offline
    Thekinghasnoclothes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,803

    Quote Originally Posted by Potatoeman View Post
    The flip side to that is the population concentration in the Dublin area. There are not that many green spaces and Clontarf is one of the few that is well kept and would be considered safe. It's particularly popular for women as it’s safer than most parks in the city.
    Put a path on top of the 11 degree slope.

    That way the ladies can see the sea and the Clontarf Road and everyone will get a better view of the Ladies
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #44
    DaveM DaveM is offline
    DaveM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    17,799

    Quote Originally Posted by Potatoeman View Post
    The flip side to that is the population concentration in the Dublin area. There are not that many green spaces and Clontarf is one of the few that is well kept and would be considered safe. It's particularly popular for women as it’s safer than most parks in the city.
    So what alternative do you think they should pursue?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #45
    pinemartin pinemartin is offline
    pinemartin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,283

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith-M View Post
    I used to live in Clontaf and it's far more than just a view that's going to be lost. There's a whole amenity on the coast walk for walking, jogging, cycling etc. It's a ridiculous that we are going to spend millions diverting water from the Shannon and the enviironmental impact on the mid-west and Shannon Estuary and we haven't looked at using desalination, which would also reduce the flooding risk.
    how would desalination reduce the flooding risk?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #46
    Lurka19 Lurka19 is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    71

    All the relevant docs are on the Pleanala website under ref JA0008 (I can't post links yet) apart from plans which are in the EIS someone posted earlier.

    They used the fast-track process which involves going straight to An Bord Pleanala and which is used for major structural projects. I don't agree with this process as it involves stealth, less notice and chance of objections than the normal local authority process and is basically used to get large scale government projects which would attract the most objections through with the least hassle. However, the residents associations were aware but they say they were led to believe that the wall would not be higher than 1m. Local politicians say the same even though there is reference to the wall being 2.5m in certain places in the Inspector's Report??

    The proposal will permanently ruin the promenade in Clontarf and there must be some other way to achieve the goals sought. Once this happens there is no prospect of changing it back. The new wall will be nearer to the road than the current sea wall in most areas, the prom will not be visible from the road, making it unsafe for users and there will be a no-man's-land between the current sea wall and the new wall in some areas. How will this be policed? It will become redundant for the common user at the very least, shrinking the size of a widely used amenity.

    They say the mound is necessary as there will be a watermain running underneath it which will supply 20m litres of water a day to the North East of Dublin (for which they will start charging as soon as they can, I assume). I notice there are other watermain upgrades going on in adjoining areas at the minute and I wouldn't be surprised if the interests of insurance companies and the government in upgrading the water supply with a view to charging are being stealth fast-tracked here with environmental interests and the interests of ordinary people being trampled upon.

    I am aware that the planning process has been completed and that some will say it is too late to object but there is someting inherently wrong with a planning process which is designed to deny objections for projects which are the most objectionable. This process was introduced late in the Bertie era.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #47
    Dylan2010 Dylan2010 is offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,657

    Quote Originally Posted by Potatoeman View Post
    The flip side to that is the population concentration in the Dublin area. There are not that many green spaces and Clontarf is one of the few that is well kept and would be considered safe. It's particularly popular for women as it’s safer than most parks in the city.

    might be true but surely that calls for better management of parks and the wall designed in a way that doesnt have blind spots. Something like The pier in Dun Laoghaire where you walk on the inside of the wall
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #48
    Thekinghasnoclothes Thekinghasnoclothes is offline
    Thekinghasnoclothes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,803

    Quote Originally Posted by Lurka19 View Post
    All the relevant docs are on the Pleanala website under ref JA0008 (I can't post links yet) apart from plans which are in the EIS someone posted earlier.

    They used the fast-track process which involves going straight to An Bord Pleanala and which is used for major structural projects. I don't agree with this process as it involves stealth, less notice and chance of objections than the normal local authority process and is basically used to get large scale government projects which would attract the most objections through with the least hassle. However, the residents associations were aware but they say they were led to believe that the wall would not be higher than 1m. Local politicians say the same even though there is reference to the wall being 2.5m in certain places in the Inspector's Report??

    The proposal will permanently ruin the promenade in Clontarf and there must be some other way to achieve the goals sought. Once this happens there is no prospect of changing it back. The new wall will be nearer to the road than the current sea wall in most areas, the prom will not be visible from the road, making it unsafe for users and there will be a no-man's-land between the current sea wall and the new wall in some areas. How will this be policed? It will become redundant for the common user at the very least, shrinking the size of a widely used amenity.

    They say the mound is necessary as there will be a watermain running underneath it which will supply 20m litres of water a day to the North East of Dublin (for which they will start charging as soon as they can, I assume). I notice there are other watermain upgrades going on in adjoining areas at the minute and I wouldn't be surprised if the interests of insurance companies and the government in upgrading the water supply with a view to charging are being stealth fast-tracked here with environmental interests and the interests of ordinary people being trampled upon.

    I am aware that the planning process has been completed and that some will say it is too late to object but there is someting inherently wrong with a planning process which is designed to deny objections for projects which are the most objectionable. This process was introduced late in the Bertie era.


    Have you looked at the drawings at pages 18,19,20,21,22, on the EIS

    link provided in early posts?

    The proposal is for an 11degree slope to a levy with grass on both slopes!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #49
    Keith-M Keith-M is offline
    Keith-M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    24,761

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveM View Post
    Desalination would reduce flooding risk? I think it's safe to assume you're not an engineer.
    Surely taking water out of Dublin Bay would lower the water level. Yes, I'm aware that you get a salty residue but would the lower water level reduce flooding risk?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #50
    sic transit sic transit is offline
    sic transit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    23,276

    Quote Originally Posted by Lurka19 View Post
    All the relevant docs are on the Pleanala website under ref JA0008 (I can't post links yet) apart from plans which are in the EIS someone posted earlier.

    They used the fast-track process which involves going straight to An Bord Pleanala and which is used for major structural projects. I don't agree with this process as it involves stealth, less notice and chance of objections than the normal local authority process and is basically used to get large scale government projects which would attract the most objections through with the least hassle. However, the residents associations were aware but they say they were led to believe that the wall would not be higher than 1m. Local politicians say the same even though there is reference to the wall being 2.5m in certain places in the Inspector's Report??

    The proposal will permanently ruin the promenade in Clontarf and there must be some other way to achieve the goals sought. Once this happens there is no prospect of changing it back. The new wall will be nearer to the road than the current sea wall in most areas, the prom will not be visible from the road, making it unsafe for users and there will be a no-man's-land between the current sea wall and the new wall in some areas. How will this be policed? It will become redundant for the common user at the very least, shrinking the size of a widely used amenity.

    They say the mound is necessary as there will be a watermain running underneath it which will supply 20m litres of water a day to the North East of Dublin (for which they will start charging as soon as they can, I assume). I notice there are other watermain upgrades going on in adjoining areas at the minute and I wouldn't be surprised if the interests of insurance companies and the government in upgrading the water supply with a view to charging are being stealth fast-tracked here with environmental interests and the interests of ordinary people being trampled upon.

    I am aware that the planning process has been completed and that some will say it is too late to object but there is someting inherently wrong with a planning process which is designed to deny objections for projects which are the most objectionable. This process was introduced late in the Bertie era.
    The link
    Pleanála: JA0008: ()
    I realise that it was fast-tracked but that doc is from 2008. What have the residents been up to in the meantime?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment