Eirgrid in Rush - Mod Warning in Post #1

imokyrok

and I'm sick to the back teeth of the nimbyism of the protesters. Ireland needs this Eirgrid and delaying it for selfish reasons is unconscionable. And Rogerstown Estuary is a wildlife sanctuary you would imagine Rush residents would want to protect not put under further stress since it is already coping with major
sewerage works.

I'll bet they are the same people going around with a petition objecting to the new mobile phone mast with mobiles sticking out of their back pocket.

Sandyhills ms

I have to agree i think coming up the estuary of an annex 1 protected area seems craazy! I really don't understand why a the route can't be run through fields somewhere along the skerries road towards Drumanagh then out along the road and across fields without any major interuption to roads or schools or residents or nature reserves.
I don't think labeling people as nimbys is helpful, nobody has said it shouldn't come through the area ,its the route is the problem. Had people not protested 20 years ago would we have our lovely library in a historic listed building ? we certainly wouldn't. An interesting article in the Sunday Times 'Home' section 29th aug 2010 stated that Dublin would have lost much of it Georgian heritage along with gaining many eyesores had it not been for people standing up in the 1960's. As for the mobile mast ,theres a place for everything as i have said many times , a protected sensitive landscape which has been classed high amenity is not the right site .

Corsendonk

Sandyhills ms wrote: »

I have to agree i think coming up the estuary of an annex 1 protected area seems craazy! I really don't understand why a the route can't be run through fields somewhere along the skerries road towards Drumanagh then out along the road and across fields without any major interuption to roads or schools or residents or nature reserves.
.

Your new route intersects the gas pipe line interconnector if you run it towards Drumanagh.....unless your thinking of running each side by side?

Beasty

imokyrok wrote: »

I'll bet they are the same people going around with a petition objecting to the new mobile phone mast with mobiles sticking out of their back pocket.

Sandyhills ms wrote: »

As for the mobile mast ,theres a place for everything as i have said many times , a protected sensitive landscape which has been classed high amenity is not the right site .

The O2 mast discussion is over there, and was separated from this one for a reason. Please stay on topic.

Thanks

Beasty

imokyrok

Sandyhills ms wrote: »

I have to agree i think coming up the estuary of an annex 1 protected area seems craazy! I really don't understand why a the route can't be run through fields somewhere along the skerries road towards Drumanagh then out along the road and across fields without any major interuption to roads or schools or residents or nature reserves.
I don't think labeling people as nimbys is helpful, nobody has said it shouldn't come through the area ,its the route is the problem. Had people not protested 20 years ago would we have our lovely library in a historic listed building ? we certainly wouldn't. An interesting article in the Sunday Times 'Home' section 29th aug 2010 stated that Dublin would have lost much of it Georgian heritage along with gaining many eyesores had it not been for people standing up in the 1960's. As for the mobile mast ,theres a place for everything as i have said many times , a protected sensitive landscape which has been classed high amenity is not the right site .

But this is not about Georgian architecture it's about traffic disruption. Not a good enough reason to delay a much needed project or to disrupt a precious wildlife sanctuary - we have few enough of them in this neck of the woods. If Rush residents put the effort into demanding facilities for our children and teenagers and a bi pass that they do into protesting against piddling inconveniences like these what a wonderful village we could have.

sashasdad

I think the risk of childhood cancer is more of a concern to the protesters than traffic disruption.

The Hill Billy

I can understand that, but the research material referred to by the 'No Campaign' related to overground transmission. A different beast entirely. The electro-magnetic emissions from the underground shielded cable are well within accepted safety standards.

Corsendonk

sashasdad wrote: »

I think the risk of childhood cancer is more of a concern to the protesters than traffic disruption.

True, anyone establish yet if the local schools have been tested for radon gas?

sashasdad

Hill Billy wrote: »

I can understand that, but the research material referred to by the 'No Campaign' related to overground transmission. A different beast entirely. The electro-magnetic emissions from the underground shielded cable are well within accepted safety standards.

Thats not the information I came away with from the last public meeting. The sooner the presentation they gave goes online the better. I'm not going to risk misquoting

Beasty

This is at least the 6th warning in this thread to stay on topic. The next offender can expect a ban

Thanks

Beasty

Corsendonk

See good ould Trev supports the re routining but doesn't directly mention the Rogerstown route so his loyal green supporters don't beat him over the head with his bird table when next he shows off his splendid garden.

http://rushcc.blogspot.com/

LeoB

imokyrok wrote: »

But this is not about Georgian architecture it's about traffic disruption. Not a good enough reason to delay a much needed project or to disrupt a precious wildlife sanctuary - we have few enough of them in this neck of the woods. If Rush residents put the effort into demanding facilities for our children and teenagers and a bi pass that they do into protesting against piddling inconveniences like these what a wonderful village we could have.

Thats a pretty pathetic response and off the mark.
1) Its not about traffic disruption it about health and safety. I made a point earlier about the way Eirgrid conducted a survey on Traffic on a quiet road. So if you want to trust this expert they Pay go ahead. I heard what was said at the meeting and am delighted some people are fighting our corner.

2) a BY-PASS has been on the cards for quite a few years and it actually nearly came to pass around the time of the last L.A.P. A few routes were proposed

3) Numerous Rush residents have complained about the lack of facilites for a long time and in fairnes to all the clubs they have all upgraded their facilities over the last few years with the help of decent and kind local support and 1 club is looking into pretty serious development at the moment so for you to include your last sentence is way off the mark
4) In case you didnt know we do have have a wonderful village, great people working away at various projects with up to now not great support but that is changing, we have excellent clubs, a fab new library thanks to people standing up to bullies over 20years ago, a great theathre, superb schools but like everywhere else there is always room for improvment and no matter what improvment comes there will be a few assholes who knock just about everything,

dan_d

A thought has occured to me...can anyone link me to the proposed route of the interconnecter? How does it cross the railway line and at what point?

Corsendonk

http://www.eirgridprojects.com/media/East%20west%20route%20map.pdf

They won't disrupt the railway line as there is a bridge there that they can go under. Another reason that the route was picked or you face digging under the line if you decide to go Drummanagh direction like a previous poster mentioned, and the poster seem to have forgot that you would be either cutting across the gas interconnector or running beside it.

LeoB

Corsendonk wrote: »

See good ould Trev supports the re routining but doesn't directly mention the Rogerstown route so his loyal green supporters don't beat him over the head with his bird table when next he shows off his splendid garden.

http://rushcc.blogspot.com/

So what is the problem with supporting the re routing? He didnt say if I remember correctly he supports it going up the estuary, but taking into consideration the concerns of residents of Rush he supports it being re routed. Remember the estuary is only 1 route and I am sure the "Re route Eirgrid campaign" would welcome any suggestions of another route.

Corsendonk

LeoB wrote: »

So what is the problem with supporting the re routing? He didnt say if I remember correctly he supports it going up the estuary, but taking into consideration the concerns of residents of Rush he supports it being re routed. Remember the estuary is only 1 route and I am sure the "Re route Eirgrid campaign" would welcome any suggestions of another route.

Well whats the others routes on the table? Apart from placing it through a bird santuary I don't see another route outside that won't hold the project up for a long time and increase costs substantial. And Trev as the Greens Chief Whip can't exactly come out that he supports the route in Rogerstown.

LeoB

I am only aware of one route the Rogerstown route but I dont see a problem with going accross close to Drummanagh and Close to gas line.

He didnt support the Rogerstown route, as I have said he supports re routing. He was pretty honest when he spoke on the night as were the other public reps and all said they support the re routing but also said they "would not interfere with Planning Process"

I am not worried about about the cost, Eirgrid will get their money back by the lorry load

Sandyhills ms

Does anyone know what the problem would be with the gas and cables running side by side, I am sure going under a railway isn't an impossible engineering challenge given that they can bring it under the sea, perhaps the main st route is all about saving money instead of paying off landowners?

dan_d

Thanks Corsendonk.

I'm not concerned about them disrupting the railway line, naturally they can get around it. I just wanted to see what point they had chosen to cross it at.Looking at that route I could suggest a number of reasons why it's been chosen, but they're only guesses on my part so I won't!

Interesting that they apparently chose to go along the side of the estuary, rather than through the middle of. Given that the concern is apparently wildlife (birds)..surely the edge of the estuary is necessary for the aforesaid birds aswell? Do we have an exact distance from the edge of the water to the proposed location of the interconnector? Or from the existing boundary (as delineated on a map by FCC or whatever relevant body) to the the line of the interconnector?

I would imagine that one of the main reasons that you wouldn't want electricity alongside gas is the fact that at some point Paddy the digger driver or his associates would inevitably hit either the gas or the electricity during the works and cause a major problem.Asides from the fact that it's a bloody nuisance trying to get the 2 to work - cris-crossing/levels/ensuring all regulations are met for depths/separation distances. (I speak from experience!)

Martron

Sandyhills ms wrote: »

Does anyone know what the problem would be with the gas and cables running side by side, I am sure going under a railway isn't an impossible engineering challenge given that they can bring it under the sea, perhaps the main st route is all about saving money instead of paying off landowners?

as far as i know they just lay the cable on the sea bed and is not too technically demanding.

as for railway tracks or other obstacles like rivers or large roads ( crossing roads) they can use a method called directional drilling. and is a short distant solution to crossing obstables the cant be disturbed.

in relation with the cable running next to the gas. there will be an exclusion zone around each cable. but they should not affect each other unless there is communication cables near the gas pipe which the cable may effect in close proximity.

Corsendonk

One of the latest scare tactics is to warn about the dramatic drop in property prices in Rush due to the interconnector. Do they not realise that their own negative publicity on the effects of the interconnector most likely has already done this?

http://en-gb.facebook.com/pages/Rush-Needs-You/115079605204194

dan_d

Common sense...is not that common.

LeoB

dan_d wrote: »

Thanks Corsendonk.

but they're only guesses on my part so I won't!

Interesting that they apparently chose to go along the side of the estuary, rather than through the middle of. Given that the concern is apparently wildlife (birds)..surely the edge of the estuary is necessary for the aforesaid birds aswell? Do we have an exact distance from the edge of the water to the proposed location of the interconnector? Or from the existing boundary (as delineated on a map by FCC or whatever relevant body) to the the line of the interconnector?

I would imagine that one of the main reasons that you wouldn't want electricity alongside gas is the fact that at some point Paddy the digger driver or his associates would inevitably hit either the gas or the electricity during the works and cause a major problem.Asides from the fact that it's a bloody nuisance trying to get the 2 to work - cris-crossing/levels/ensuring all regulations are met for depths/separation distances. (I speak from experience!)

Ah do give your reasons, despite the dis agreement here some of us are happy to hear fair points been made.. Just like the re route campaign I am not against the Eirgrid project but I dont trust them. I had my first corrospondence from them this evening, a bit late to be trying to bring people onside dont you think?

You are right about the work in the estuary. I have been told by a person working down there They are working in places about 15 meters from the high water mark and behind the ditch to the right as you look up the estuary, or accross the estuary from channel Rd. I dont have the exact distance but if you walk through the fields towards Rogerstown there are plenty of nesting birds there so I think that makes a nonsence of their S.A.C argument, and sure look at what Fingal are doing on the green space where hundreds of birds feed at low tide.

I do think down the road there is a huge danger of Paddy (or most likely Oleg) hitting a cable and doing untold damage. This should be a cause of concern for everyone.

The point made about the value of houses has been made a long time ago by individuals going back to Dump protests 15 years ago. Some feel this is just adding to that particular concern.

Corsendonk

LeoB wrote: »

I dont have the exact distance but if you walk through the fields towards Rogerstown there are plenty of nesting birds there so I think that makes a nonsence of their S.A.C argument, and sure look at what Fingal are doing on the green space where hundreds of birds feed at low tide.
.

Most of those fields are private property so can we discourage the walking part unless there exists right of way. That green space down at rogerstown doesnt prevent from birds landing on it.

LeoB

Corsendonk wrote: »

Most of those fields are private property so can we discourage the walking part unless there exists right of way. That green space down at rogerstown doesnt prevent from birds landing on it.

Is it not time you stopped nit picking and being so selective about what and how you quote?

What you have selected to quote this time is in the context of giving dan_d directions and a feel for the area. I am encouraging noone to trespass you are taking things out of context again!! Knowing all the land owners in the area we are talking about none of them have a problem with people using their headlands once they respect the property they are on and dont mess with their crops. Well I have never been asked to get out and I do quite a bit of photography down there. People have often got caught at high tide and had to go up the bank near Rogerstown House" and back accross the fields.

What dan_d asked/pointed out I think, is the importance of the side of the estuary to the birds. The birds nest at the side of the estuary from Rogerstown right up to the hides at the bridge on the Donabate side and the young family of swans that were there actually spent more time in the mash which is on the right as you walk out the small road. Lots of young birds feed in the fields where their nest are all along the estuary. There appears to be quite a few Oystercatchers and shell ducks down there.

Now please tell me what bird is going to land around where you have catterpiller and J.C.Bs working, Emu does not count:). In case you have not seen it these Catterpillar diggers are doing a lot of moving equipment and pipes. If you watch this area a lot of birds used to feed just off the green space

Corsendonk

LeoB wrote: »

Is it not time you stopped nit picking and being so selective about what and how you quote?

What you have selected to quote this time is in the context of giving dan_d directions and a feel for the area. I am encouraging noone to trespass you are taking things out of context again!! Knowing all the land owners in the area we are talking about none of them have a problem with people using their headlands once they respect the property they are on and dont mess with their crops. Well I have never been asked to get out and I do quite a bit of photography down there. People have often got caught at high tide and had to go up the bank near Rogerstown House" and back accross the fields.

What dan_d asked/pointed out I think, is the importance of the side of the estuary to the birds. The birds nest at the side of the estuary from Rogerstown right up to the hides at the bridge on the Donabate side and the young family of swans that were there actually spent more time in the mash which is on the right as you walk out the small road. Lots of young birds feed in the fields where their nest are all along the estuary. There appears to be quite a few Oystercatchers and shell ducks down there.

Now please tell me what bird is going to land around where you have catterpiller and J.C.Bs working, Emu does not count:). In case you have not seen it these Catterpillar diggers are doing a lot of moving equipment and pipes. If you watch this area a lot of birds used to feed just off the green space

I better quote your entire ramblings then before you take any more offence then in the future I actually know that part of Rush, its not as active in that green space as you make out, fairly overgrown which doesn't happen when you have all that movement of machinery you maintain. I do remember when that space didn't even exist and like the dunes all the garbage rubble from the town went into building it up. Certainly hope they add an extra layer of top soil to it when they clean it up as the surface wasn't too soft to land on when playing football. You prob noticed that yourself.

Why are we even talking about this area??? Its not part of Eirgrid, its FCC and the new water treatment plant yet the mods allow you to bring it up each time when you start your foaming at the mouth about FCC.

Beasty

Corsendonk wrote: »

Why are we even talking about this area??? Its not part of Eirgrid, its FCC and the new water treatment plant yet the mods allow you to bring it up each time when you start your foaming at the mouth about FCC.

Corsendonk

You have made some very well constructed posts in this thread, and have managed to educate some of us about the underlying issues. You then insist on spoiling things by going off-topic, or having sly digs at other posters

Take a week off to have a think about your posting style

Beasty

LeoB

Eirgrid can come up the estuary. FACT. As I pointed out earlier and I think you will agree communication has beeen a huge problem and I blame Eirgrid this. They have serious funding and and only half done their job in notifying people. A few leaflets here and there. They lost the trust of a lot of people. Maybe the gunbarrell is nearly out of smoke but fair play to the people who have backed this campaign. No matter what happens a stand has been made by a group of people and I think we can look forward to Rush not getting dumped on again by any company or organisation. We have a town we can be very proud of, now we just need to get people to make things different and better it wont be done

Just to clarify
The reason I rambled on was to point out where it actually is (site) I am not encouraging anyone to tresspass, The area is overgrown ok. Bio diversity iirc. Its quite common for Reclaimed bits of land this size to have all sorts dumped into it to build it up.
Just used it for kites myself.

The area was open for Eirgrid to use if they wanted. I was pointing out the inconsistancy in their points of it being a protected are yet Fingal let other works go ahead.

I have had some issues with Fingal and this is one of them. If you go back through other threads I am quite complimentary about F.C.C.
I try and take each topic and discussion on its merits but sometimes I do generalise. I recieved a warning here a few days days ago and had a lucky escape yesterday a red card a few weeks ago and been banned a few times and I managed all that myself so please let the mods rest, oh **** I dont like whats coming. Slán

dan_d

Corsendonk wrote: »

I better quote your entire ramblings then before you take any more offence then in the future I actually know that part of Rush, its not as active in that green space as you make out, fairly overgrown which doesn't happen when you have all that movement of machinery you maintain. I do remember when that space didn't even exist and like the dunes all the garbage rubble from the town went into building it up. Certainly hope they add an extra layer of top soil to it when they clean it up as the surface wasn't too soft to land on when playing football. You prob noticed that yourself.

Why are we even talking about this area??? Its not part of Eirgrid, its FCC and the new water treatment plant yet the mods allow you to bring it up each time when you start your foaming at the mouth about FCC.

Am I the only one left that's allowed to post so??;)

We're talking about this particular area because I brought it up. I brought it up after looking at the map and wondering out loud why the estuary is designated as a protected area for birds, but the interconnector route is along the side of the estuary, fairly tight to the water.Last I checked, most birds would be resident around the edges of the estuary, as they don't reside under the water (bear in mind that I am not a bird expert - in fact I know little about them other than I'm not mad about pigeons:D) Logically, I would then assume that bringing the interconnector along that tight to the water would interfere with the birds anyway. Hence voiding the "protected area" argument on Eirgrid's part. As an aside, I do know that area quite well and I don't trepass on anyone's land.

To be honest, I don't know why I'm bringing this up as I have no major objections to the route! Eirgrid CAN come up the estuary, but weighing the cost and construction methods vs the cost and construction methods of coming through Rush....it may be fairly tricky.It would quite likely mean that the sailing club would be seriously interfered with, and then you'd have them out, plus the nature types on protecting the birds. There's no way they'll keep everyone happy in this. I see another leaflet in the door yesterday evening on the subject from Eirgrid (quickly followed by a "public Rally" one from the Rush campaigners this morning), and they are still answering the same incorrect questions...the depth the cable will be buried at, the size of the power transmitted etc.

The main objections here are the idea of possible radiation and health issues, followed by the traffic problems. Traffic problems are temporary, and as I've said before, if we are doing anything it should be working with Eirgrid to try and influence their traffic management plans and working times to suit Rush. Local businesses will probably do quite well out of the whole thing, as builders have to eat - and usually more so than the average person!;). So we're down to possible health issues, and we have no concrete data to back that up one way or another, but as I've said before, I would have my doubts as to whether or not there would be any more danger than the wireless transmitter for broadband in most homes.

Eirgrid's biggest mistake in this route was to route past a school...people get extremely hyped up about that kind of thing.I've had a look at that Facebook link posted earlier in the thread, and there's a level of hysteria there that, quite frankly, scares me somewhat!! It's partially uninformed hysteria aswell which is even more off putting.

On a different note - where do new water treatment plants come into all of this????

imokyrok

LeoB wrote: »

Thats a pretty pathetic response and off the mark.
1) Its not about traffic disruption it about health and safety. I made a point earlier about the way Eirgrid conducted a survey on Traffic on a quiet road. So if you want to trust this expert they Pay go ahead. I heard what was said at the meeting and am delighted some people are fighting our corner.

2) a BY-PASS has been on the cards for quite a few years and it actually nearly came to pass around the time of the last L.A.P. A few routes were proposed

3) Numerous Rush residents have complained about the lack of facilites for a long time and in fairnes to all the clubs they have all upgraded their facilities over the last few years with the help of decent and kind local support and 1 club is looking into pretty serious development at the moment so for you to include your last sentence is way off the mark
4) In case you didnt know we do have have a wonderful village, great people working away at various projects with up to now not great support but that is changing, we have excellent clubs, a fab new library thanks to people standing up to bullies over 20years ago, a great theathre, superb schools but like everywhere else there is always room for improvment and no matter what improvment comes there will be a few assholes who knock just about everything,

Knock things like a major innovation that will benefit the whole country - don't I know it! As for facilities I know what has been done and what still has to be done. I compare the facilities in other comparable towns and we just don't compare at all. Mainly due to our lack of political representation. On the one occasion recently we did manage to get local political representation he shafted his community and got kicked out at the next election. But that's another issue.

The science is clear that this project is of no danger to our children. It can and indeed will benefit our children. Nothing ever happens in Ireland without naysayers try to prevent progress. I'm very disappointed in Trevor Sargent for encouraging unscientific fears. I thought I'd voted for someone with the intellect to examine the evidence.