Crazy council plan for clontarf.

bamboozle

Degsy wrote: »

So 5000 "clontarf residents" turned out to stop the council interfering with thier Lovely Sea view.

A proportion of them were concerned about the affect this development would have on thier house prices,yes?

How many of these good citizens turned out to protest the previous three savage budgets the economy has been subjected to,or the handing over of our soverignty to the IMF?

But when thier beautiful view is threatened or a few grand knocked off the value of thier houses they protest in huge numbers.

Can you see why i'm less than sympathetic to thier plight?

oh dear me, so let me get this straight, because the residents of clontarf (of which i am one) didnt protest in sufficient numbers against Bertie Ahern driven government ineptitude and because you consider the restaurants on the seafront to be 'overpriced dumps' we deserve to have a public amenity destroyed and replaced with a 9 foot eyesore?

outstanding logic.

Degsy

bamboozle wrote: »

oh dear me, so let me get this straight, because the residents of clontarf (of which i am one) didnt protest in sufficient numbers against Bertie Ahern driven government ineptitude and because you consider the restaurants on the seafront to be 'overpriced dumps' we deserve to have a public amenity destroyed and replaced with a 9 foot eyesore?

outstanding logic.

I suppose people who have a vested interest in seeing house prices remain high would have no interest in protesting against govt policy.

However when it looks like they personally might be discomoded in some way then they run to form action groups and stage protests.
You cant have it both ways unfortunately.

bamboozle

Degsy wrote: »

I suppose people who have a vested interest in seeing house prices remain high would have nio interest in protesting against govt policy.

However when it looks like they personally might be discomoded in some way then they run to form action groupa and stage protests.
You cant have it both ways unfortunately.

firstly, are house prices high anywhere? secondly, it hardly takes a rocket scientist to figure out this wall will reduce the property values of the properties in the immediate area, however this is not the main issue, the main issue issue is that the seafront is a much loved ameniety of many locals and other who use it to run, walk, cycle, play football, if this wall goes up this will no longer be the case.

if it was solely an issue of the 300 houses on the stretch losing further value on their house then we would have seen a handful of people out protesting, the fact it was 5000 just shows how people from the area feel about it.

if you had any knowledge of the area you would probably realise the community of clontarf has for many years been strongly united against the many attempts of the Dublin Port company to landfill 52 acres of sea for port use, this is a community that has been united in its support of its local environment and this level of unity was very much evident in yesterday's turnout.

I'm sorry you dont like the area, its people or its restuarants and it doesnt live of to the esteem in which you seem to hold Dalkey, however for those of us born and raised in the area we just want our corporation which is funded by our taxes to provide a sufficient flood defence system and not a cheap, i'll thought, short sighted 9 foot wall.

monument

RATM wrote: »

This. The biggest eyesore in Dublin, the power station at Poolbeg ruins any semblance of a view. It is even worse over at Sandymount, I can never understand people paying €2m+ for a house that looks out on two ugly chimney stacks, much better views in Killiney & Dalkey IMO.

There has always been mixed views on this, some people like you seem to hate them, while others love them and some people don't care. See this poll I just started on another thread.

Degsy

bamboozle wrote: »

firstly, are house prices high anywhere? secondly, it hardly takes a rocket scientist to figure out this wall will reduce the property values of the properties in the immediate area, however this is not the main issue, the main issue issue is that the seafront is a much loved ameniety of many locals and other who use it to run, walk, cycle, play football, if this wall goes up this will no longer be the case.

if it was solely an issue of the 300 houses on the stretch losing further value on their house then we would have seen a handful of people out protesting, the fact it was 5000 just shows how people from the area feel about it.

if you had any knowledge of the area you would probably realise the community of clontarf has for many years been strongly united against the many attempts of the Dublin Port company to landfill 52 acres of sea for port use, this is a community that has been united in its support of its local environment and this level of unity was very much evident in yesterday's turnout.

I'm sorry you dont like the area, its people or its restuarants and it doesnt live of to the esteem in which you seem to hold Dalkey, however for those of us born and raised in the area we just want our corporation which is funded by our taxes to provide a sufficient flood defence system and not a cheap, i'll thought, short sighted 9 foot wall.

It seems that the principle objections seem to be
1) The people who own property in the area may lose out financially.

2) The people who come to mince up and down the promenade might be less than pleased to find the view of the docks diminished.

Are there not more important matter at play..for example the clontarf road is a busy thouroghfare pretty much 24/7,the East Link is reached from here and clontarf bus garage serves a large area with public transport.

If teh road was to be flooded for any length of time it would be a huge inconvenience to people in sorroundng areas and to people who drive through clontarf from other parts of Dublin.

In other words,sever flooding in an area vital to traffic flow would ahve disaterous consequences across the city and not just for a few Power Walkers and house-price-obsessed NIMBYs.

bamboozle

Degsy wrote: »

It seems that the principle objections seem to be
1) The people who own property in the area may lose out financially.

2) The people who come to mince up and down the promenade might be less than pleased to find the view of the docks diminished.

Are there not more important matter at play..for example the clontarf road is a busy thouroghfare pretty much 24/7,the East Link is reached from here and clontarf bus garage serves a large area with public transport.

If teh road was to be flooded for any length of time it would be a huge inconvenience to people in sorroundng areas and to people who drive through clontarf from other parts of Dublin.

In other words,sever flooding in an area vital to traffic flow would ahve disaterous consequences across the city and not just for a few Power Walkers and house-price-obsessed NIMBYs.

once again you are missing the point, no-one is against flood defence measures, local residents are against Dublin Corporation sneaking through plans for flood defence walls of up to 9 feet high when during the consultancy period they stated at highest the walls would be 1.1metres.

ps if DCC consider Clontarf Road to be an important thoroughfare they could at least resurface it, pot holes everywhere.

RMD

Degsy wrote: »

Are there not more important matter at play..for example the clontarf road is a busy thouroghfare pretty much 24/7,

It's not really. Unless you live in Clontarf you'll have little use for it, if you're going to an area beyond Clontarf from town you'll take the Howth road as it's quicker and more direct. As the poster said above, if it really is an important route it wouldn't be in such a condition.

As said, if this was solely in relation to the property prices of 300 homes 5000 people wouldn't have turned out. That was just a minor point I came up with, it's not the main point of any protesters. Of an area of 30000 people, 5000 showing up to a quickly organized protest gives a pretty strong indication of the area's feelings on this.

expectationlost

it seems the view may have been ruined by the previously presumed height aswell, and isolated the amenity, people may have reacted against that too when they went to build it, even at the lower height i think people have already lost what they are fighting against.

is this the case of buildings putting in plans for 5 stories in order to bargain down to 4.

i've also realised the dublin council has been secretly run by lex luthor all these years

judas101

Degsy wrote: »

So 5000 "clontarf residents" turned out to stop the council interfering with thier Lovely Sea view.

A proportion of them were concerned about the affect this development would have on thier house prices,yes?

How many of these good citizens turned out to protest the previous three savage budgets the economy has been subjected to,or the handing over of our soverignty to the IMF?

But when thier beautiful view is threatened or a few grand knocked off the value of thier houses they protest in huge numbers.

Can you see why i'm less than sympathetic to thier plight?

I'm surprised at your attitude towards this as is not just a local issue.
Many Dubs (north and south) enjoy the stretch by the water.

Also, you're quite uninformed on the subject.

The speakers at the protest were quite clear in the message that flood protection was needed, but this is not the right solution.
Even the residents who have been flooded in the last few years are opposed to this proposal,

Originally, the plans were for a mound of 2-3 feet, but this was changed without planning notification or informing local residents/business associations.

The reason for the change is that they plan to combine the planned new watermain to Baldoyle in this project.
This means that an overground pipe will be contained in the mound.

In some places, the mound turns into a wall (Areas around the Baths, Car park by the Yacht club etc.)

This mound/wall will be up to 8 ft high. There are serious concerns about the creation of a haven for unsupervised antisocial behavior as the area between the mound and water will be completely invisible from the street.

Please drop the childish 'clontarf-snob/house prices' BS argument as you obviously have some sort of personal issue with the area.

There's lots of material available to inform yourself about the issue both on the web and on display in the sheds pub but I presume you have an issue with stepping in there too.

To summarize: Solution required, this is not the correct one.

gurramok

Somehow an 8ft wall was grand for the residents of Irishtown\Ringsend to protect their homes from the Dodder, but its not on for residents of Clontarf?

Its as if they have an attitude, "ah sure, it will never flood here".

Degsy

judas101 wrote: »

I'm surprised at your attitude towards this as is not just a local issue.
Many Dubs (north and south) enjoy the stretch by the water.

Also, you're quite uninformed on the subject.

The speakers at the protest were quite clear in the message that flood protection was needed, but this is not the right solution.
Even the residents who have been flooded in the last few years are opposed to this proposal,

Originally, the plans were for a mound of 2-3 feet, but this was changed without planning notification or informing local residents/business associations.

The reason for the change is that they plan to combine the planned new watermain to Baldoyle in this project.
This means that an overground pipe will be contained in the mound.

In some places, the mound turns into a wall (Areas around the Baths, Car park by the Yacht club etc.)

This mound/wall will be up to 8 ft high. There are serious concerns about the creation of a haven for unsupervised antisocial behavior as the area between the mound and water will be completely invisible from the street.

Please drop the childish 'clontarf-snob/house prices' BS argument as you obviously have some sort of personal issue with the area.

There's lots of material available to inform yourself about the issue both on the web and on display in the sheds pub but I presume you have an issue with stepping in there too.

To summarize: Solution required, this is not the correct one.

You know of course that the existing promenade was built as a flood-relief measure and it caused huge problems when it was built first,one of which was that dogs used to get stuck in the mud and die howling over a period of days.

Of course verybody is used to it now and people are quite happy to go mincing along,blissfully unaware of the trouble this "amenity" caused when it was being built.

So,your objections will be noted but in time forgotten about.

judas101

Degsy wrote: »

You know of course that the existing promenade was built as a flood-relief measure and it caused huge problems when it was built first,one of which was that dogs used to get stuck in the mud and die howling over a period of days.

Of course verybody is used to it now and people are quite happy to go mincing along,blissfully unaware of the trouble this "amenity" caused when it was being built.

So,your objections will be noted but in time forgotten about.

As a dog owner myself, i find that terribly disturbing. Sadly, considerations such as this rarely pass through the mind of planning authorities.

According to current planning, which has been approved and send to tender, this project is due to begin in January.
I'd be very surprised if it breaks ground then. Hopefully not at least!

If local people feel strongly about protecting their local amenity then why begrudge their right to protest?

judas101

gurramok wrote: »

Somehow an 8ft wall was grand for the residents of Irishtown\Ringsend to protect their homes from the Dodder, but its not on for residents of Clontarf?

Its as if they have an attitude, "ah sure, it will never flood here".

Are you suggesting that different areas in Dublin are favored over others with regard planning applications?

I should think you'd like to keep it that way seeming how you're from D4

expectationlost

judas101 wrote: »

Originally, the plans were for a mound of 2-3 feet, but this was changed without planning notification or informing local residents/business associations.

no they thought it wouldn't be more then 1.6meters/5.3 feet to

i guess is what had previously seen, what are those measurements on note 1



this EIS http://www.dublincity.ie/WaterWasteEnvironment/waterprojects/Documents/Appendix%203%20Part%204%20EIS%20Report.pdf shows the greater heights, its says november 2010 was that when it was published?

page 86 shows the graph which shows the various above ground heights

http://www.herald.ie/news/5000-turn-out-with-roddy-doyle-to-fight-9ft-flood-wall-2908034.html

DCC:The promenade is not level so the defences vary from 0.85m (2ft10in) to 2.75m (9ft), reaching a uniform height.

I specifically remember a barrier height of 0.6m to 1.1m being discussed.
http://naoise.ie/?p=1514

can anyone find those figures in relation to dublin flood defences

gurramok

judas101 wrote: »

Are you suggesting that different areas in Dublin are favored over others with regard planning applications?

No The Clontarf residents should cop on and drop the objection on the basis relating to their 'lovely sea views being obstructed'.

The residents of Ringsend\Irishtown learnt the hard way at least 10 years ago and fully accepted the huge wall that was required to protect their homes.

The Clontarf residents should accept the best engineering plan to protect their homes or else they will have to learn the hard way of having their homes severely flooded with the misery it brings. If that engineering solution is some huge wall, they will have to accept it for the greater good.

bamboozle

gurramok wrote: »

No The Clontarf residents should cop on and drop the objection on the basis relating to their 'lovely sea views being obstructed'.

The residents of Ringsend\Irishtown learnt the hard way at least 10 years ago and fully accepted the huge wall that was required to protect their homes.

The Clontarf residents should accept the best engineering plan to protect their homes or else they will have to learn the hard way of having their homes severely flooded with the misery it brings. If that engineering solution is some huge wall, they will have to accept it for the greater good.

i'm a Clontarf resident and would be quiet happy to accept the best engineering play to protect my home from flooding, unfortunately a 9 foot high mound is not it.

_blank_

bamboozle wrote: »

i'm a Clontarf resident and would be quiet happy to accept the best engineering play to protect my home from flooding, unfortunately a 9 foot high mound is not it.

What is?

Have the residents drawn up their own plans, or are they just making noise and telling the Council to "get another plan"?

bamboozle

Des wrote: »

What is?

Have the residents drawn up their own plans, or are they just making noise and telling the Council to "get another plan"?

many suggestions, repair existing flood wall for a start, a dyke from sutton to sandycove across dublin bay to prevent storm water surges was mentioned on here as part of previous planning paper.

building a 9 foot mound designed to double up as a flood prevention barrier and to hide an overground water mains pipe out to Baldoyle is not the answer.

Degsy

bamboozle wrote: »

many suggestions, repair existing flood wall for a start, a dyke from sutton to sandycove across dublin bay to prevent storm water surges was mentioned on here as part of previous planning paper.

building a 9 foot mound designed to double up as a flood prevention barrier and to hide an overground water mains pipe out to Baldoyle is not the answer.

Engineering experts to a man:rolleyes:

Why havnt the council gone with your alternative plans? is there an issue of expense perhaps?

bamboozle

Degsy wrote: »

Engineering experts to a man:rolleyes:

Why havnt the council gone with your alternative plans? is there an issue of expense perhaps?

well actually that did come from engineers, please refer to page 18 of the attached report from THE ENGINEERS ACADEMY OF IRELAND which puts forward this dyke suggestion, you're just not giving up are you!!!

http://www.euro-case.org/publications/transport/TransportIreland.pdf

I dont understand people like you, firstly its the overpriced dump restuarants of clontarf you have issue with, next its the pseudo snobs from clontarf who all want to live in Dalkey, next Clontarf folk deserve this as they didnt protest against government cutbacks, seriously were you dumped by a guy/girl from clontarf and your heart still aches? there must be some reason for your irrational issues & idiotic posts on an area you clearly dont live?

Degsy

bamboozle wrote: »

well actually that did come from engineers, please refer to page 18 of the attached report from THE ENGINEERS ACADEMY OF IRELAND which puts forward this dyke suggestion, you're just not giving up are you!!!

http://www.euro-case.org/publications/transport/TransportIreland.pdf

I dont understand people like you, firstly its the overpriced dump restuarants of clontarf you have issue with, next its the pseudo snobs from clontarf who all want to live in Dalkey, next Clontarf folk deserve this as they didnt protest against government cutbacks, seriously were you dumped by a guy/girl from clontarf and your heart still aches? there must be some reason for your irrational issues & idiotic posts on an area you clearly dont live?

Calm down.
I'll ask the question again..Why havnt the council gone with the alternative plans? Is there an issue of expense?

expectationlost

bamboozle wrote: »

well actually that did come from engineers, please refer to page 18 of the attached report from THE ENGINEERS ACADEMY OF IRELAND which puts forward this dyke suggestion, you're just not giving up are you!!!

http://www.euro-case.org/publications/transport/TransportIreland.pdf

I dont understand people like you, firstly its the overpriced dump restuarants of clontarf you have issue with, next its the pseudo snobs from clontarf who all want to live in Dalkey, next Clontarf folk deserve this as they didnt protest against government cutbacks, seriously were you dumped by a guy/girl from clontarf and your heart still aches? there must be some reason for your irrational issues & idiotic posts on an area you clearly dont live?

you know that they suggest putting a motorway on top of it, but yes look at the gov response cost effective, means cheapest option

i know they have hypothesized a floating berm aswell

this is the 2007 report vision for dublin bay which suggests tidal barrage on page 33 http://www.dra.ie/documents/AVisionforDublinBay.pdf
but suggests tidal power and a road presumable as method to pay for it. bit pie in the sky/line on a map
also a flood proof lock across the ends of the bull walls.!

gurramok

It doesn't say in the report how high a dyke would be. The dykes in Holland are pretty high, you sure that is ok yet a wall is not?

Degsy

gurramok wrote: »

It doesn't say in the report how high a dyke would be. The dykes in Holland are pretty high, you sure that is ok yet a wall is not?

If they think the govt has tens of millions to waste on building dykes out to sea to suit the Power Walkers and Pannini set of Clontarf they must be delusional.

John_Rambo

Degsy wrote: »

If they think the govt has tens of millions to waste on building dykes out to sea to suit the Power Walkers and Pannini set of Clontarf they must be delusional.

Degsy, the city council are laying a water pipe and mounding muck over it and calling it a flood defense.

It's lazy, it's stupid, they went about it in a sly way.

The promenade is an integral part of the coast line, dog walkers, cyclists, walkers, runners, footballers, weight lifters, families, the elderly, locals, non-locals (me) and foreigners use it every day, it's also vital to winter graising for Brent geese.

I'm not from Clontarf, but I'd hate to loose the view on the coast road, I like cycling or walking along, seeing the egrets, curlews and the other birds in and over the water. No money can buy this, it evolves over time.

I don't know what your problem is with Clontarf and people who live on the coast road, obviously something is up there. But this working class teenage hero thing is getting tiring. People have the right to protest and DCC are acting like lazy fools in this case.

drkpower

John_Rambo wrote: »

But this working class teenage hero thing is getting tiring.

Dont mind him. His views are an irrelevency.

The reality is that now that this issue has been identified and the residents have been mobilised, it should lead to a proper consultation process. If other reasonable cost effective measures have not been fully considered, they should be now. Hopefully there are alternatives that will not spoil the amenity that is the Clontarf prom yet will provide the flood defence (and the Baldoyle/NE Dublin water main) and which are not prohibitively expensive. It may be that there are no actual cost effective measures other than what has been proposed but from what I have heard thus far I doubt that is the case.

bamboozle

Degsy wrote: »

If they think the govt has tens of millions to waste on building dykes out to sea to suit the Power Walkers and Pannini set of Clontarf they must be delusional.

what suprises me most about your comical and ill informed ranting against all things Clontarf is that you not once thought of mentioning the one (only) good reason of all to build a 9 foot mound...it would hide Ivor Callely from view as he ponces along the seafront every morning while he's pretending to be in west cork!

oh and to answer your previous question, of course there's an issue of cost, there's also an issue of common sense and going through the democratic consultative process with the residents who are under threat from flooding and not just throwing up a 9 foot mound as a cheap and short sighted solution.

Either way there's no getting through to you, You think Clontarf sucks, thankfully there's plenty of us that dont and we'll be fighting for a proper, fit for purpose cost effective solution to this problem.

TheRealPONeil

bamboozle wrote: »

... and we'll be fighting for a proper, fit for purpose cost effective solution to this problem.

"cost effective solution" - you hit the nail on the head there. This is an engineering solution to a problem (i.e. protecting your homes from rising insurance costs !! ).

Of course the IMF/ECB will need to be consulted on anything more extravagant than a "cost effective solution".

Degsy

John_Rambo wrote: »

The promenade is an integral part of the coast line, dog walkers, cyclists, walkers, runners, footballers, weight lifters, families, the elderly, locals, non-locals (me) and foreigners use it every day, it's also vital to winter graising for Brent geese.

So it doesnt actually pay its way as an 'amenity'? You dont need a sea view to engage in any of these activities.

Brent geese will graze on any open grass area which i presume will be a feature of the new,grass-covered mound...and cant people do thier dog-walking or power-walking along the top of it too? Wont there be a path?

And for those in the cheap seats..the country is almost bankrupt..do you really think the Govt is going to shell out for Dykes stretching from Howth to Sandymount?

I mean lets keep it believable.

John_Rambo

Degsy wrote: »

So it doesnt actually pay its way as an 'amenity'?

Yes, it does. It costs hardly anything to maintain and keeps the citizens in good health, saving millions on health.

Degsy wrote: »

You dont need a sea view to engage in any of these activities.

No, YOU don't, all you need is a keyboard. Thousands and thousands peoples opinion differs to yours.

Degsy, no matter how much you look down on a community, it's not right that they are bullied in to having their area changed dramatically. They have a right to protest and a right to have a say in what goes on in their community.

You can remain on your pedestal and decide what communities deserve what treatment based on affluence and what part of Dublin they live in, fortunately, it isn't up to you and never will be. In this case people are fighting back against a lazy plan to ruin coastal parkland.

I have seen your other posts about the area, your hate campaign against Gerry Ryan (you got your wish there), the contempt you hold for various citizens. Your a classical hide behind the PC warrior, spewing what you would never dare to say to someones face.