Development of Dun Laoghaire seafront

This is Dun Laoghaire we are talking aboutand proposing such a scheme would equate to political suicide.

PVCK, not everyone will be as au fait with Political suicide in DLRCoCo as your goodself – you might care to elaborate. In any event, leaving politics aside, whaddya think?

It looks great but how much are you going to charge for entry?

Put simply that area of the pier is the only area that has not been tinkered with and remains more or less faithful to its victorian origins. Filling in say 20 – 50 acres of sea to create a private or public-private leisure complex doesn’t appeal to me and would make the reaction to the Dun Laoghaire baths proposal look like a storm in an espresso cup.

The town has the best maritime facilities on the East coast between the subline East pier and Scotsmans bay / forty foot and most certainly doesn’t need a florida style gymmic project. If you want the beach go to Killiney, Sandymount or Rush.

The real blot on the landscape down there is Carlisle pier which the local harbour board mangaed to allow to rot despite the best intentions of Liebskind, SOM and Heneghen Peng. The last thing that is required is crayon plan a couple of hundred metres away.

I think the political reaction to the previous baths plan related to (a) the size/height of the proposed complex and (b) selling public assets, the baths (which were for the enjoyment of the masses, even though long closed) for the enjoyment of the wealthy few and (c) a minority who claimed to be regular and frequent users of the baths (in which case they‘d probably still be open).

I don’t think that any of the protest groups (and there were several agendas) would be too worried about the architectural heritage of that area of the East Pier which seems to concern your goodself. The fact is that this area is the scene of cider and drugs parties at night – the original Victorian shelters have been fenced off for years with wire in an effort to reduce the numbers involved in these nocturnal activities.

The Plage would be a very welcome (free) public amenity, particularly for people with young families. It would link the existing amenities of the East Pier (with its long closed public toilets) and the small but pretty Peoples Park – popular with families with small toddlers. The nearby small beach in Sandycove is very popular with such families, but it disappears entirely at high tide.
Final construction may not be entirely in crayon. The Plage might not win approval of the architectural aesthete, but it should appeal to the common man.

I like your idea. You might need to extend the beach further to capture any sunlight.

But, ‘Dun Laoghaire Plage’ are you taking the mickey? Dun Laoghaire Beach would be fine. Irish people are used to artificial beaches in the Canaries, Paris… You’d also want to be sure there were no effluent pipes left in the area. The rear end of a pier tends to be a dirty smelly place.

Pretentious, moi? “Plage” is just there to get people to take a look. If DLRCoCo & the Harbour Company would build something like this they can call it anything they like. The Keegan-Hanahoe Memorial Swimming Hole, perhaps?

An intersting exercise but IIRC there are a lot of rocky outcrops in that corner – would there be major environmental/civil engineering complications?. Mollox is correct on the anti-social behaviour front -I once or twice indulged in a two litre of Linden Village around there in my errant teenage years ( a while back at this stage!). It would be nice to see just the basics sorted out around DL at the moment though e.g. the poor old duck pond in Moran’s park.

I think it’s a fine idea (so long as it was well maintained) and wouldn’t cause any of the controversy of the baths redevelopment so it should get welcome support from the good burghers of Dun Laoghaire. The whole problem with the baths redevelopment was the 12 storey tower proposal.

Strange drawing, stranger idea. The road plan does not reflect the actual situation, which has become a busy and complicated intersection since DL was pedestrianised. There used to be a pool of sorts in that corner, now fallen into neglect. Although there are some drains (I think it is wastewater run-off rather than sewage??) the main smell is from rotting seaweed. That corner is a trap for all water-borne crud when there is any wind from the east (predominant in summer) Whatever breakwater is placed there it will have to be very substantial with an external armouring of boulders, as anything lighter would not last one storm. Also, storm waves would easily sweep over the wall and then wash away the sand as positioned. The “beach” as positioned will be in the shade for most of the day.
I agree with RoryW that the height/privatisation was the main cause of objection to the baths plan – as was the same issue for the Carlisle eyesore. There is another possible cause of objection for La Plage – last year a new bus route opened from Tallaght to Dun Laoghaire; the bus disgorged ehhhh …. adolescents… at a bus stop directly outside the O’Briens’ offo where they loaded up with cans and then made their way to the seafront for a session. Daily. BTW the Moran Park “duck pond” is an old reservoir, and was used by the Royal Navy for watering. Its present condition is a disgrace.

The beach as positioned will actually get any available sun from mid-morning to late afternoon. Winter storms would obviously be a problem, but the beach might be opened on a seasonal basis e.g. March-October? The area might be flooded for the rest of the year and could provide a relatively safe area for swimming. The regular smell is just rotting seaweed, which can be quite strong in hot weather. “Tallaght bus” problem has been commented on by a local publican, but if it exists then it needs to be managed whether there’s a beach or not. The “duck pond” full of beer cans and empty plastic bottles – more local action than Tallaght visitors.

Mollox,
This is pie-in-the-sky stuff. Why waste money on that when there are far more efficient ways of improving the Borough? The DART has increased access to the sea for many. Shankill, Killiney, Seapoint, Blackrock, Booterstown, etc. stations deposit hundreds onto the beaches every fine day. What is wrong with swimming/playing there?
If the Plage is not demolished by a storm it will be filled with seaweed, and left that way. DLRCC – notably the Parks Dept., has a dreadful record of maintaining almost everything to do with public spaces. Look for example at
The state of Dun Laoghaire, Sandycove and Blackrock Baths and Vico bathing place
The state of the access to White Rock beach– that once was a picnic area, now a briar jungle.
The state of the railings around Killiney/Dalkey hills
The state of the boundary and internal walls in those areas (dating to famine relief in 19th and 18th centuries)
The state of the paths/walks on both of the above hills
The state of Dillons and Sorrento parks
The state of Moran Reservoir
The state of the rotten old cast iron water pipe system, leaks in which sent a chunk of Killiney Hill onto the railway line a few years ago
Coastal erosion between Dalkey- Shankill

DLRCC should spend money where it is needed, not on poxy vanity projects.
.

AngryBog, I agree with you on the record of DLRCoCo – they can’t even keep the public toilets on the East Pier open, but they can install parking meters on residential streets out in the burbs and introduce clamping.

The beach proposal has to be viewed in the context of the baths/seafront redevelopment, long promised. Many of the baths protesters wanted a swimming facility, the council sub-committee agreed that such a facility should be included in the final plan. Beach should augment whatever else they propose for the baths themselves – the council are committed to spending money on this area anyway. Reinstating the baths alone to dodge the political heat would be “a poxy vanity project“, wasting public money on a facility few people would ever use – unless it can be incorporated into a larger amenity with wider appeal.

Je ne comprends pas l’expression ‘poxy vanity project.’

C’est la mare aux canards complète de boîtes de bière et de bouteilles vides de plastique.

Quel est le problème, eh, Dun Laoghaire?

@manifesta wrote:

Je ne comprends pas l’expression ‘poxy vanity project.’

C’est la mare aux canards complète de boîtes de bière et de bouteilles vides de plastique.

Quel est le problème, eh, Dun Laoghaire?

Deux aspects de cette plage me laisse sceptique :
1. La qualité de l’eau à proximité d’une ville de plus d’un million d’habitants
2. La température de l’eau !
I don’t know what you guys think about bathing in Irish waters, but last time I tried it, I had the impression I’d fallen off the Titanic into the icy Atlantic!
The beach’s prime purpose must be for people to avail of the lovely Irish sunny weather….
Sarcasm apart, what is the purpose of the beach?

Manifesta: Non, le “Poxy Vanity Project” n’est pas la mare aux canards. KerryBog2 n’aime pas la plage. Pour lui, c’est la merde de canard.

Constat:
The water quality has been much improved by the pumping of sewage to the Ringsend plant. There was indeed a time when swimming in Scotsman’s Bay was described as “going through the motions”.

As for swimming in the Irish sea – visit Sandycove and the Forty Foot on any sunny day and you’ll see the demand for such amenities. The enclosed nature of the proposed beach would also mean that the temperature of the water should be higher than that of the open sea.

The purpose of the proposal is to maximise the amenity value to families, particularly those with smaller children, given that the local council is committed to develop the amenity value of the sea front in this location and do something with the now derelict public baths. An adjoining beach could provide a new lease of life for swimming baths, providing a swimming/seaside facility with a much wider appeal to all ages.

The East Pier is probably the most popular public amenity in south county Dublin, while the nearby People’s Park, though small, is a popular and safe spot for parents with toddlers. The beach would be both convenient and popular with them. The small Sandycove beach nearby is thronged during the summer months, but disappears completely at high tide. It’s a very good indicator as to potential demand for such a facility.

I’ve no problem with scepticism, I’m certainly not holding my breath that the council would develop such a facility, even if they bought into the idea.

Manifesta, Constat,

D’où sortez-vous?
D’abord, un « poxy vanity projet£ » est, en deux mots, de bâtir un château en Espagne, la rêve des égoïstes nuls. On a plusieurs chez DLRCoCo!
En plus, il faut qu’on n’oublie pas les capots et les crottins flottants !
A+
KB

I got the impression from DLRCOCO that what ever is done with this area, there would be a certain amount of landfill in the area of your beach Mollox. This would link to Newtown Smith green and form part of the planned S2S route as far as I am aware (if it ever goes ahead).

Who knows what DLRCoCo will ultimately propose following their about-turn on their first baths proposal.

However, the beach could be moved further out to facilitate the S2S proposal. Alternatively, the breakwater could become a more substantial causeway for pedestrians incorporating a cyclepath. The Greens are proposing some sort of marine park for the location.

The beach proposal is clearly aspirational – I just want to get reaction to the concept and the perceived amenity value for local residents and visitors – or the lack of it, as evidenced by some of the responses to date.

@mollox wrote:

….., the breakwater could become a more substantial causeway for pedestrians incorporating a cyclepath.

Nice idea on paper – but are there not rules about cycling on the pier? It would have to be a substantial breakwater to withstand the gales – and we get one every six weeks on average. When a NE gale coincides with high tide, waves wash over the East Pier with regularity. So, when there is a gale and the seaweed is washed over the b-water, how is the “pool” cleaned?
The park at Newtownsmith regularly has weed on it after a gale; it was created by infill in the 1930’s??
KB2

Cycling on pier – just a change of bye-law required. Presumably S2S will have to cross the top of the pier anyway.

Storms – beach open Mar-Oct (see post 20th Apr) so winter storms not such a problem. Pool can be drained by sluice gate at low tide and/or pumping mechanism (see original “plan” 17th Apr ). Regular clean-up operation to be carried out by DLRCoCo (stop laughing!) or whoever they appoint to manage whatever they decide to do with old baths.
On the continent a heavily used public beach facility would be cleaned daily by the local authority.

I’m a local and anything to push that decrepit negligent shower of donkeys on Marine Road into action is ok by me. On this particular scheme; i think it’s good, and worth examining. However DLR is now a notoriously difficult place to work in. Inertia is the order of the day. Nothing has changed in years. There are backward idiots who believe reintroducing traffic onto George’s street will save the traders. There’s pathetic traffic management in the town, and the shoppin centre needs bombing…

but yeh keep pursuing these things and don’t let comments like “poxy vanity projects” get in the way. when was the last great development ever described as anything else?

Who doesn’t love the beach? I know i do

Mollox you should know better than floating an idea that is ambitious and anyway different from the norm,
(in this, the land of begruders)

🙂 Off to Paris this morning for a couple of days. Maybe I can cadge a couple of plastic palm trees and surplus pedalos from their plage and get this project off to a flying start. From the timing of this, you can tell I’m flying Ryanair.

Mollox,
I was in Brum yesterday and they also are going down the beach route – at a cost of £50k. See
http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk/birminghampost/news/tm_headline=beach-comes-to-birmingham&method=full&objectid=18949190&siteid=50002-name_page.html

I have no problem with the creation of a beach, it is the suitability of the location that I have the issues with. If one is to be built by DLRCC, a breakwater extending westward from the existing pharbour at Sandycove would make a lot more sense – that position is protected from all points of the compass, would give far more shoreline, ease congestion and be cleaned by the tides. Personally, looking at the vast expanses of flesh on view in DL today, and comparing that with what is on view in Paris, free burkas from DLRCC would be better advised.

@KerryBog2 wrote:

Personally, looking at the vast expanses of flesh on view in DL today, and comparing that with what is on view in Paris, free burkas from DLRCC would be better advised.

😀
Now how do I explain that belly laugh to my colleagues?

@ctesiphon wrote:

😀
Now how do I explain that belly laugh to my colleagues?

you don’t – you encourage them to join the site

KB2, Let’s not involve Mairin de Burca or vast expanses of flesh in this debate. I’ve a weak stomach – my long weekend in Paris was more plague than plage. I was hors de combat for a couple of days with a dose of the Galway Gallops, accompanied by the occasional burst of Liquid Laughter. Dirty ice in my Ricard, perhaps. Could we lend Minister Richard Roche to Paris?

Birmingham Plage sounds like something I saw in Beauvais town centre a couple of years ago where the only water involved consisted of a couple of showers provided to cool people off. It was good for a passing laugh but seemed to provide little real amenity value – very few visible users.

My particular beach proposal, specifically the location, arose from last’s years cock-up/impasse regarding redevelopment of the long-derelict baths complex. The theory is that developing a seaside amenity, with much wider family appeal, connected to modified baths/catering facilities, would greatly increase the chances of the overall amenity being successful i.e. popular and well used by the community. The local DART service and multiple bus routes into Dun Laoghaire would make it accessible to a wide catchment area. Traffic management/parking is already an issue in DL, but the invisible gardai will be no more effective in Sandycove than they currently aren’t in DL.

Sandycove also has many appealing possibilities, as you’ve outlined. What then would you do with the baths?

Mollox,
Sorry to hear about the innards, but I would not blame the ice. Like Ireland, Paris has a dual water system, potable and non-potable, the latter pipe system used for street cleaning, hydrants, park sprinklers, etc. However, Ireland’s dual system is best described as toxic and not-so-toxic, depending on where you live. In DLR spice is added by cross-percolation, due to broken/rusted cast iron supply/soil pipes.

Re votre plage – DL baths should be refurbished and modernised, with no major development. Call it pastiche if you like, but that is what should be done. They were on their last legs in the 1960’s, every north easterly added to an unrepaired trail of destruction, the cubicle doors (I clearly remember the blue colour) were rotting off their rusted hinges, the storms cracked the pool walls and parts were plain dangerous. It was easy to bunk in over the wall and spend the 6d on a cone in Teddys. Zero maintenance allowed this (thankfully to me at that time.)
The Baths revival as the Waterworld (or whatever it was called) in the early ‘80’s showed that there remained a big demand; at that time it was a developer who had the lease (can’t recall his name, but he built that really horrid shopping centre in Tallaght village….)
My objection to your proposal is not the idea of developing a beach, it is the choice of a highly unsuitable location (from an oceanographic perspective) that would lead to costly on-going maintenance. Tout court.
KB2

@KerryBog2 wrote:

Re votre plage – DL baths should be refurbished and modernised, with no major development. Call it pastiche if you like, but that is what should be done. They were on their last legs in the 1960’s, every north easterly added to an unrepaired trail of destruction….. My objection to your proposal is not the idea of developing a beach, it is the choice of a highly unsuitable location (from an oceanographic perspective) that would lead to costly on-going maintenance.
KB2

KB”: It seems to me that your refurtbished and modernised baths will also need additional protection (from an oceanographic perspective). Anything that would provide shelter for the baths could surely provide added protection for my beach?

If you were bunking into the baths in the 60s, you probably knew all the Cluny & Dominican convent girls who used hang out there (before my time but my brother told me about it).

@KerryBog2 wrote:

The Baths revival as the Waterworld (or whatever it was called) in the early ‘80’s showed that there remained a big demand

Wasn’t it Rainbow Rapids? 😮

I have similar memories of bunking into the derelict Blackrock Baths in the late 1980s, KB2, but that’s a story for another day.

(FJP has photos of both sites, fyi.)

Yeah Rainbow bleedin Rapidz. Didn’t some poor lad slice his leg open on some cracked plastic on one of the shoots? I never went back.

According to the latest edition of the Lifetimes freesheet, DLRCoCo “have chosen an international engineering firm to carry out a feasibility study for the re-development of the town’s sea baths”. I can’t see any reference to this on http://www.dlrcoco.ie.. The article gave no indication of a timeframe for a report/ recommendation.

The attached photo illustrates one of the problems with the existing baths, quite apart from its complete exposure to the elements on the seaward side. The buildings throw their shadow across the pool area – a problem that’s exacerbated in the off-peak months when the sun is lower in the sky. While this shade might be desirable on a limited number of our hottest summer days, those are vastly outnumbered by days when you’d want to be on the sunshine side of the pool.

When the complex was built in Victorian times, this may well have been regarded a s a bonus, as a sun tan was evidence of employment in some form our outdoor labouring employment

@ctesiphon wrote:

Wasn’t it Rainbow Rapids?

Thanks ctesiphon, that’s it! The developer’s name was Seamus Greally.

Mollox – I was never a fan of the Cluny girls, too close to home, the sisters went there! This is not the site for the different merits of HCK, Loreto or Glengara!:)
The baths site is not in the corner, so the cross-seas would not be as bad. On the seaward side of the baths they could install some armouring with large boulders leading to an angled barrier-wall with integrated wave deflector. My guess is that would be sufficient (but I am not an expert.) There is a wave deflector on Jim Sheridans house (de Blacam & Meagher) on Dalkey Sound, http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/images/2007/0412/1176156959231_1.html seems to have worked, although he is now selling, supposedly for 7-8 million.
On a day like today it is hard to think that the sea can be so powerfully violent.
KB2

Can someone explain the nostalgia for the baths to me? To me these are no more than concrete boxes that disfigure the shore. Why would anyone want to swim in a concrete box full of seawater rather than the sea itself? Why would you repose on concrete in an area concentrated with other people and their noise and filth when you could repose on the sand or the flat rocks that are cleaned by the sea twice a day? Am I missing something here? Does the seawater heat up in the pool? Is it safer? Is there some victorian structure of beauty beneath the concrete?

FT: I don’t suppose anyone would be attracted to swimming in the baths as they currently exist. And obviously not enough people were attracted when they were open. The protests last year had a touch of “Bewleys Syndrome” about them – if everyone who claimed to have been a regular and frequent user of the baths was telling the truth, the place would have been overrun with customers every day.

Presumably any plan for new baths will have to be a much more attractive facility – people will now want something of the quality of such facilities they’ve experienced on holiday abroad. Unfortunately, the ingredient that can’t be supplied is the sunshine, which is an essential ingredient for the young “leisure“, rather than dedicated, swimmer. These young “leisure” swimmers would constitute the majority of the potential customers of a new baths.

I have no problem with a new baths being built, provided it can generate sufficient public usage. The last thing we need is a political cop-out, bowing to the pressure of last year’s protesters and building a facility which will be significantly underused. In those circumstances, we’ll be having another debate, a decade later, about what to do with the “new” baths as they show the results of under-investment in maintenance because of low public usage and the toll exacted by the sea and the salt.

The purpose of my beach proposal was to provide an amenity, either on its own or coupled with a new baths facility, which would broaden considerably the scope and appeal of what’s available in the immediate area, thereby attracting a much wider audience, with particular appeal, I hope, to children – from toddlers (and their minders) to teenagers.

Two rival designs for development of Dún Laoghaire unveiled
The Irish Times

A multimillion-euro plan to transform Dún Laoghaire’s coastline into a “world-class” tourist attraction was unveiled yesterday. Two designs for the site along the East Pier to Sandycove were presented to councillors at a private local authority meeting. “Concept A”, which would cost €129 million, envisages a lagoon beach and a pedestrian bridge adjacent to the East Pier. An aquatic play area is intended for the old public baths site, alongside a civic space comprising a restaurant and spa. An underground car park with up to 500 spaces would be provided for visitors. “Concept B” would cost €92 million and involves provision of a new promenade and sandy beach from the East Pier to the Newtownsmith section. The works entail construction of offshore and shore-connected breakwaters approximately 250m (820ft) out to sea. A new water sports centre in a revamped Sandycove Park would feature. Either concept would be a massive undertaking and necessitate reclaiming one and a half acres of land from the sea. Councillors decided both should be presented for public consultation.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/0222/1203619239302.html

---

Two rival designs for development of Dún Laoghaire unveiled
The Irish Times

A multimillion-euro plan to transform Dún Laoghaire’s coastline into a “world-class” tourist attraction was unveiled yesterday. Two designs for the site along the East Pier to Sandycove were presented to councillors at a private local authority meeting. “Concept A”, which would cost €129 million, envisages a lagoon beach and a pedestrian bridge adjacent to the East Pier. An aquatic play area is intended for the old public baths site, alongside a civic space comprising a restaurant and spa. An underground car park with up to 500 spaces would be provided for visitors. “Concept B” would cost €92 million and involves provision of a new promenade and sandy beach from the East Pier to the Newtownsmith section. The works entail construction of offshore and shore-connected breakwaters approximately 250m (820ft) out to sea. A new water sports centre in a revamped Sandycove Park would feature. Either concept would be a massive undertaking and necessitate reclaiming one and a half acres of land from the sea. Councillors decided both should be presented for public consultation.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ire…619239302.html

========================================
Presumably, if either of these proposals resemble my “Plage”, they’ll be sending me an appropriate fee.:rolleyes:
I sent the proposal to Owen Keegan of DLRCoCo in August 2006 and didn’t even get an acknowledgement.:(

Thought of you Mollox when I read this. I’ll claim my bit of that fee for my input on the breakwater – I see they are planning 250m of it! Waiting to see plans first, but the underground car park in such a marine environment could be a bit fishy (literally!) Went by there some weeks ago and saw a drift of seabirds, oystercatchers and the like ,sheltering on the park, with heads firmly tucked under their wings as the waves lashed the coast. If they in-fill from Sandycove Baths to the East Pier it will be just adding to existing infill, as the park at Newtownsmith is of relatively recent creation (1940/50’s?) Anyone know?
K.

Does anybody have any more information on the multimillion-euro plan to transform Dún Laoghaire’s coastline into a “world-class tourist attraction”, as reported in the Irish Times last week? Sounds ominous.

Is this more kite flying or will something really come out of it?

@KerryBog2 wrote:

Thought of you Mollox when I read this. I’ll claim my bit of that fee for my input on the breakwater – I see they are planning 250m of it! Waiting to see plans first, but the underground car park in such a marine environment could be a bit fishy (literally!) Went by there some weeks ago and saw a drift of seabirds, oystercatchers and the like ,sheltering on the park, with heads firmly tucked under their wings as the waves lashed the coast. If they in-fill from Sandycove Baths to the East Pier it will be just adding to existing infill, as the park at Newtownsmith is of relatively recent creation (1940/50’s?) Anyone know?
K.

KB2, please accept my assurance that your share of my fee :rolleyes: will be fully commensurate with the level of your recorded support for the beach proposal.;)

The outlines of the two sea-front proposals can be seen at http://www.dlrcoco.ie

Lagoon proposal reproduced below.

Concept A: Dún Laoghaire Lagoon

1. A lagoon beach constructed adjacent to the East Pier with a linking pedestrian over bridge.
2. An aquatic play area on the old baths site with a civic space and a building with a restaurant, providing for alternative therapies etc.
3. An underground car park with up to 500 spaces
4. New upper and lower walkways along entire sea frontage with plaza and viewing areas.
5. Accommodation of the S2S project along the entire route.
6. Limited land reclamation along Newtownsmith to facilitate civic amenities including the ‘Festival of World Cultures’.
7. A newly landscaped Sandycove Park with water sports buildings.
8. Improved facilities for Sandycove Harbour

Is the no.2 in the wrong above, are the baths not at the orange triangular thing.
Just an observation 🙂

@ForzaIrlanda wrote:

Is the no.2 in the wrong above, are the baths not at the orange triangular thing.
Just an observation 🙂

The “No.2” is the pedestrian bridge linking the back of the East Pier to the proposed breakwater surrounding the “lagoon”. And the baths are indeed at the “orange triangular thing” as you rightly surmise. I’m not clear what’s causing you confusion here.

However, I bet you can’t see “No.14 – Underground car park (500 cars)”
Is this because
(a) it’s underground, you’re not supposed to see it from an aerial view 🙂 and/or
(b) this is a DLRCoCo production 🙁

That bubble wrap along the edge better not be more tumbled granite boulders.

Have we completely lost the ability to build quay walls?

Here’s the other concept

Concept A could possibly work, but 500 cars down there on a sunny day is questionable! Conscept B is not possible in my view, due to the probable build-up of detritus from prevailing winds. The smell of rotting seaweed would be horrific and no scouring by tidal action. (Kerrybog knows these waters from the days when he was a young supple dinghy sailor!) No. 14 in B is the existing car park.
Scary that DLRCC would publish such a major plan without knowing the difference between a mole, a jetty and a breakwater, but then, just look at the other stuff they do…… Any guesses on what the Dept. of the Marine might say? Is there a marine equivalent of the lesser spotted toad or slug??

@KerryBog2 wrote:

Conscept B is not possible in my view, due to the probable build-up of detritus from prevailing winds. The smell of rotting seaweed would be horrific and no scouring by tidal action. (Kerrybog knows these waters from the days when he was a young supple dinghy sailor!) No. 14 in B is the existing car park.

Supporters of Concept B should also examine Blue-flagged Seapoint beach, which is a very similar though naturally occuring amenity, and ask why this is so relatively under-utilised by bathers & families with small children.
Seapoint even has its own DART station (Salthill) where you can simply throw your bucket and spade over the station wall and you’re on the beach.
And Seapoint enjoys a more sheltered position than Newtownsmith, protected as it is by Dun Laoghaire harbour.

All a bit over the top if you ask me.

Let’s just put a decent, modest baths with a childrens pool and a cafe on the site.

Here’s my blog post:

http://cuffestreet.blogspot.com/2008/03/dn-laoghaire-baths-update.html

Ciarán Cuffe

I think dealing with the moratorium on developing Sandyford Cherrywood etc requires prioritisation over this, but I still like elements of the plans (except why the hell does an area served by the 46A and the DART need 500 parking spaces – where are the bike racks?). Once the private sector element was removed we were never gonna get more than a “modest” proposal built. I actually like Newtownsmith as it is anyway.

I regularly despair at this ludicrous excuse for a County Council.

The litany of travesties goes on:
Blackrock Baths
DL Baths
Sandyford
Monkstown Ring Road
Cherrywood…

Hey Alonso

I am with you on this – I live in this councils area – – 500 parking spaces, muppets. DL is a dying town, ask anybody who owns a shop there and any of the young people in the area what their views are on DL. One main problem is traffic and the lack of access to the centre, council still not able to decide on best approach. Now they are hell bent on completing the charging for parking around Dart stations leading to even less reason to go or visit there. Perhaps the council will control the 500 spots and use them as a means to generate revenue -again:mad:

Rant over -I like this proposal but have my doubts on how clean the water will be in the beach area, what about the rats who live along the pier?, also this area is prone to large waves coming in from the HSS.

Ciaran – I am sure I read that you said Sandycove is not Barcelona – – it never will be with your total lack of vision. For a few months of the year Barcelona has a superior climate to ours but that should be all. Dublin is in direct competion with cities such as Barcelona. Wake up!!

I was in Barcelona at the start of January and it was very warm (sometimes hot) like summer weather. There is a big difference between the Irish climate and Barcelona. Ireland: Grey, miserable. Barcelona: Bright, dry.:(

Maud: try B in mid-july – hot, sticky, dusty and oppressive (and full of pickpockets and wide-boys)!

@Ciaran Cuffe wrote:

All a bit over the top if you ask me.

Why not continue the discussion here?
https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=6092

.

knock the whole thing down. it looks pathetic on google maps/earth

@Maskhadov wrote:

knock the whole thing down. it looks pathetic on google maps/earth

thankfully most of us judge the aesthetics of our urban areas from ground level rather than from space.

round a corner up a hill… say no more

The detailed drawings, including cross-sections, for the two concepts are now on display in Dun laoghaire Town Hall until 16th May.

Concept A, which includes the Lagoon Beach, is costed at €126.5m.
Concept B, which features an open-to-sea beach at Newtownsmith, comes in at €92m.

Unsurprisingly, I favour Concept A, as the Lagoon Beach element most closely resembles my original “Dun Laoghaire Plage” proposal.

BUT
Concept A implementation is proposed in 4 distinct phases.
Phases 1 & 2, which include the 500 space underground car-park, are collectively priced @ €76m.
:(The Lagoon Beach is only Phase 3, which is priced @ €32m.

However, given that Minister Dermot Ahern (?) recently announced that there isn’t a red cent available to build a new hospital in Navan, it’s hard to see central Govt providing major funding for either of these concepts.

It’ll be interesting to see if any elements of either concept ever get beyond the display stands in the Town Hall.

Meanwhile, local socialist Richard Boyd Barrett was holding a public meeting in the Kingston Hotel tonight (Mon 14th) which I was unable to attend. I await media reports with limited interest.

what buildings are involved in that plan, are there going to there apartments just outside it?

its hard to tell with a downlooking map

what htis i can’t find any

teir website don’t work any more

http://www.saveourseafront.ie/

ps is 2s being shelved again?
http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/on-yer-bike-councillors-reject-plans-for-a-cutprice-alternative-to-expensive-coastal-cycleway-1390100.html

is that detailed info not online mollox?

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/now-planners-move-to-safer-waters-over–dun-laoghaire-baths-1402738.html
so they going to choose the simpler plan b

ps

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/developers-of-harbour-tower-never-applied-for-planning-1379082.html
developer never applied for planning permission for the big tower in dun laoghaire harbour despite appearing to be working on the plan for four years.

does this article somehow suggest sos is against practical sea related developments at the harbour i hope it doesn’t, i would be all in favour of boat yard etc,was it howth harbour where a company had difficulty getting planning for boat servicing place too? industry yes fancy apartments no.

I think if you look from the ground, as well as space, you’ll see that the baths site is in an awful state, as is Blackrock Baths. Why the Council can’t just build something is beyond me, they should sell the site if they can’t get agreement from the Councillors, the whole thing is too political at this stage.

I agree that a modest development could easily be built but why so modest? Why not somewhere in between original apartment plans and modest?

Down with this sort of thing!

If anyone is interested, I took some photos from inside the Dun Laoghaire Baths the other day, thought it would good to get some photos before any new developments take place….It’s by far the creepiest place I’ve ever explored!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/1soanes/sets/72157604200112683/

Wow.

I have such vivid memories of the place in its ’80s heyday. These are indeed creepy photos. Blackrock Baths must be in a similar state these days, if not worse. I remember exploring them on the way home from school years ago (back when the 113 & 114 buses first appeared!).

(By an odd coincidence, just before opening this thread I put on Michael Nyman’s Decay Music. :))

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/locals-submit-peoples-plan-for-seafront-1472336.html
Locals submit ‘people’s plan’ for seafront
can anyone find their plan,

Seafront group pitches their idea for baths site
http://www.dublinpeople.com/content/view/942/57/

while the council’s plans appeared to provide some public amenity, he believed they were, in fact, proposals to demolish the baths and replace them with car parks and other commercially orientated buildings on the seafront.
“At best the council options are a stalling tactic to drag the issue out until the public gets so fed up it will accept anything,” he claimed. “At worst, if the council is serious, the baths will be demolished to make way for money making car parks, shops and breakwaters and then the public will be told the beach elements are not possible or will cost too much.”

Boyd Barrett is a deluded crank who needs a job – He will hitch up at any oul campaign in order to get the right wingers of Dun Laoghaire to vote for his socialist twaddle that most of us left behind in our respective JCRs. He wants housing but no rezonings, he wants redevelopment of the seafront but no private involvement – all he really wants is a place in a chamber and he was dangerously close to achieveing this last year at Ciaran Cuffe’s expense. Will the well-heeled locals fall for his crap again next year? You bet they will. develop the seafront by all means but jaysus do it sensibly and make it great!

oh yeh I forgot
“Won’t someone please think of the children!!!!”
Shops? Oh My God Shops? In a town centre???? f**k – damn you capitalism!!! And Richard, car parks only make money if the people use them – yes. The people. your people.

yep CC – a champagne socialist of the highest order. What sort of lefty hops on upper class bandwagons to prevent housing being built in an area where the locals have been priced out by, among other things, total development inertia.

Anyway back on topic with us….

The substance of the plan may actually be good. Previous ideas for this site have been overblown nonsense. The town needs leadership, the town needs governance and the town needs a massive boot up the hole. I’d almost, ALMOST, like to see a Sean Dunne type to buy the shopping centre and start throwing sense to the wind and get some sort of debate going about this once gem of a seaside settlement, now a rotting suburban corpse.

For now i’d settle for a decision.A final decision. And the same for Blackrock.

because of it was rrb who let the thing rot of course alon (anything will do ) so,

you went on about this on politics.ie and smuggly chided both sides you didn’t suggest how to break the deadlock, now you think you need a sean dunne, you think that’ll win you votes?

[QUyou think that’ll win you votes?[/QUOTE]

Shouldnt it be about what works best for the area and not votes for the boys!

Does anybody know why a new design / demolition of DL Shopping centre has not been proposed, Must be one of the worst looking buildings around.

@lostexpectation wrote:

because of it was rrb who let the thing rot of course alon (anything will do ) so,

you went on about this on politics.ie and smuggly chided both sides you didn’t suggest how to break the deadlock, now you think you need a sean dunne, you think that’ll win you votes?

Well any reasonable reader of either site will conclude that my Sean Dunne comment may not have been entirely serious. Hence the almost ALMOST in the post

To break the deadlock you make a bloody decision, stick to it, and build the damn thing. The Dunne element of my comment is that the town requires the type of shock that Ballsbridge has received in order to drag it out of the malaise and stasis it has been let slip into in recent decades by Nimbyism and brutal leadership.

Dun laoghaire town, one of Ireland’s most prosperous, a gateway seaport with magnificent natural amenities on it’s doorstep and in the areas around, LOST population in the 02-06 period. No one can stand over that statistic with anything but shame. It’s not about winning votes. It’s about proper urban governance.

Amen,alonso; I’m just back from Cork and the parallel with DL (esp. seen in Cobh) is that the maritime seascape is wonderful and there should be no excuse for neglect, even in the current blip. I did not get the impression that civic governanance was exactly on the ball, judged by the general appearance of the townscape anyway.

‘the people’s proposal’ right on comrade, now go back to the 1970s Dave Spart

still more spite is directed at the irrelevant rbb then the people that have been in charge of this mess for decades, alot waffling spitemeisters around on archeire these days

LE, i have directed my ire several times here and on P.ie at those responsible, ie the elected members and the executive. My issue with RBB is that he exploits these issues for electoral gain (He nearly got to Leinster House by bullshitting the people for Christs sake) hiding his extreme Marxism under a bushel via jumping loudly on every bandwagon going. He cosies up to people that his politics is diametrically opposed to. He cosies up to FF, FG and PD voters and fools them into voting for his redundant lefty arseology. You know my record on these issues and you should know i write with substance on both sites. I’ve spoken with the guy and find him a vacuous waffler who belongs in student politics.

looking at the previous page you spent typed a lot more words deriding about rbb and the people then anything else, your mistaking berating both sides for intelligent comment much like ther other commentators on here, at then end of the day the people weren’t wrong to reject the proposal, and don’t see enough information on the new one to reject the assertion that its still doesn’t give enough to the public.

if someone wants to build private seaside pool complex they can do it somewhere else, the council only has the old ones to work on.

perhaps read the rest of the thread then.

I solemnly swear not to mention you know who again unless you know who says something silly again

1888 – Floating Swimming Bath
Kingstown, Dublin, Ireland

including upper deck plan & midship detail
W. Kaye Parry C.E. ~ Architect

is this the latest stuff from the council http://www.dlrcoco.ie/EastPier2Sandycove/INDEX.HTM i don’t think you could call that clear, not clear on the buildings at all, there doesn’t seem to be much office,residential commercial in the councils proposal. they say themslves the buildings have not been designed I would call that an actual lack of info, not lack of reading the thread alonso.

it was impossible to see past your spittle how to your rejection of the of their plans differed from rbb’s/sos’s and as i said we havn’t seen sos’s submission so you can’t say there’s anything wrong with it.

what rbb said is pretty much exactly what mollox said about leaving the beach elements to last to run out of money yet you didn’t berate him or say that was silly.

LE, for the last time, my points re RBB were political and questioned his motives, not necessarily the substance of his argument. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day

Beach threat to bay Joyce made famous
Man-made sandy shore could ruin marine life
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/14/ireland.ireland

i though they siple wanted to restore the sea pool not cretae a beach.

Drove by the Baths last evening; ther’s a map/ plan of the proposal fixed to the western side of the baths building. Some wag has obliterated “Sandy” from Sandycove and replace it with Mosney and Disney. Nonsense about the 40 Foot silting up, the tide flows past there at 2-3 knots two hours into the flood/ebb.
K.

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

1888 – Floating Swimming Bath
Kingstown, Dublin, Ireland

including upper deck plan & midship detail
W. Kaye Parry C.E. ~ Architect

This is possibly an extension of the idea to use one of the old hulks in the harbour to house a yacht club. That idea was floated (sorry) c 1840’s.
K.

Boyd Barrett and his kind will be defeated, if I have to do it myself, damin it!!

It just shows you when you have a socialist cosying up to some of the most reactionary property owners in Dun Laoghaire and Sandycove what you can get, the silent majority will defeat the rabble in the long run.

Council has cancelled plan for ice rink

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/0925/1222207743902.html

I’m sure the reactionaries had their hand in this too 🙁

it made a big loss didn’t it. and is a bit ridiculous isn’t it an icerink, isn’t this waht we talking about here building things appropriate to the climate, ie not creating an beach where’s there’s no sun.

so you were fan of the original carlyle building plan? sunnydub.

My point about the seafront is not the merit of the design, it’s that they opposed the concept of private involvement in the development of the site on principle as if the Council shouldn’t be getting value for its money and assets be they sites or whatever…it was the combination of a socialist rabble and local property owners seeking to protect their interests.

I’d actually have faith in the Council or An Bord Pleanala, on appeal, to judge the merits of the design and protect local amenity.

My view on the proposal was that it sounded excessive but that a public-private solution could be found.:p

As for the ice rink, same old local gentry objecting, although maybe it wasn’t profitable.

Dun Laoghaire baths plan ‘a waste of money’
Mark Hilliard

http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2008/oct/19/dun-laoghaire-baths-plan-a-waste-of-money/

Dun Laoghaire council slammed over development plan on restricted land

Dun Laoghaire baths: over 1,000 submissions have been received in relation to the two proposed developments

COUNCIL officials in charge of the controversial redevelopment plans for the Dun Laoghaire Baths in south Dublin have been accused of wasting public money on the project before securing guarantees that substantial development is even possible.

It has been claimed that any redevelopment at the seafront area in Dun Laoghaire could run into problems as there are significant “restrictions” attached to leases covering the area.

The revelation has caused disquiet amongst local politicians who claim management at Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council have spent thousands of euro of tax payers’ money on both consultancy fees and the marketing of two proposed developments for the seafront area.

Both of these schemes – which involve a major rejuvenation of the seafront area and the now defunct public baths – are in public consultation phase. Plans for a major development on the coastline sparked local objections which reached fever pitch in 2005 with public marches and demonstrations.

The leases on the shoreline are held by the Department of the Marine, which entered into discussions with council officials to amend the paperwork in 2001, to pave the way for future works.

However, the Sunday Tribune has learned that these discussions were never finalised and restrictions on development remain in place.

Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council confirmed it took part in “negotiations with the relevant government departments but the negotiations were not concluded”.

The council also confirmed that the two schemes proposed for the seafront now undergoing public consultation “have not been examined in light of these old leases as no decision has been made by the council at this stage to proceed with any scheme”.

However, it would not shed light on the nature of the restrictions and said it was not possible to estimate the money spent on planning and promoting the two schemes.

“The council is not in a position to give an estimate as work is ongoing and final invoices have not been submitted,” said Bernie Gilligan, senior executive officer at the economic development and planning department. However, while confirming that the “restrictions” on the leases have not yet been addressed despite discussions with government seven years ago, Gilligan said: “We are confident that any difficulties associated with these restrictions can be overcome”.

Over 1,000 submissions have been received in relation to the two proposed developments and a report on the consultation process is expected by the end of the year. At that stage, the council’s elected members will decide the future of the project. However, the council’s spending public money on producing the concepts before ensuring the lease restrictions were amended has proved controversial.

“I think it’s a bad way to handle public money and people have told the council they don’t want this fantastic ‘Disneyfication’ of the sea front,” said local Green councillor Gene Feighery.

Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council spent a staggering €23.7m on “consultancy and professional fees” last year, it has emerged.

No comment was available from the council on the figure, which represents almost 10 per cent of its total expenditure of €240m for 2007.

The money paid on consultancy and professional fees grew more than five-fold from the 2006 figure of €4.5m.

More here
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/council-pays-out-8364237m-in-fees-for-consultants-1503277.html

The mind boggles….

While I think the Tribune story on issues regarding shoreline leases is a bit of a red herring, the alternative seafront concepts put forward for public consultation were always predicated on the availability of central Govt funding, and were far more ambitious that a straightforward “Dun Laoghaire Baths” solution.

It’s now abundantly clear that the necessary central Govt funding for either scheme is unlikely to materialise. Indeed, it was always a very long shot that it would, even if the country wasn’t in recession.

The “Lagoon Beach” element of Concept A, priced at c. €32m, is fairly close to my original “Dun Laoghaire Plage” proposal ( for which I’ve received none of the €23.7m in consultancy fees) and – surprise, surprise – I’m still in favour of that element progressing.

The worst possible outcome would be a wasted investment in re-instating the baths, broadly as they previously existed. Better to bulldoze the entire structure into the sea and let the winos, seagulls, feral cats, urban foxes, buddleias etc colonise the site.

There are new plans for a multi million project with amenities using the area over the Dart line between Dunlaoghaire and Sandycove station. A good portion of the existing trench line will be converted into a “cut and cover” syatem similar to sections of the London’s Circle and Metropolitan subsurface lines.http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/new-look-for-dun-laoghaire-conservation-area-1533238.html

i didn’t notice covering of the dart line in the plans above.

a thread on the boards where green jesus points out

That section of the line was originally built as underground.

It was the first underground railway in the British isles (if not the world) But they didn’t really know what they were doing back then and it caved-in shortly after it opened. As a result they just left it as it is now.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055419003

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/blackrock-park-is-no-dartmouth-square-1560294.html

@lostexpectation wrote:

It was the first underground railway in the British isles (if not the world) But they didn’t really know what they were doing back then and it caved-in shortly after it opened. As a result they just left it as it is now.

I’ve never heard that one before

@Rory W wrote:

I’ve never heard that one before

Anyone ever heard much of the Dublin underground planned and ready to start construction in 1914,.. until franz ferdinand took a bullet. Wrong thread but…..
https://www.tribune.ie/article/2003/nov/23/metro-plans-back-on-track/
edit, it wasn’t planned and ready… but planned!

@Bago wrote:

Anyone ever heard much of the Dublin underground planned and ready to start construction in 1914,.. until franz ferdinand took a bullet. Wrong thread but…..
https://www.tribune.ie/article/2003/nov/23/metro-plans-back-on-track/
edit, it wasn’t planned and ready… but planned!

Ah yes the Abercrombie plan – would certainly have made for an interesting Dublin

@Rory W wrote:

I’ve never heard that one before

Nor I.
It is hardly “underground” anywhere, but it is in a cutting due to local objections (nothing new!) and gradients. Lord Cloncurry, who owned Maretimo House in Blackrock, was a big objector and there was another in Kingstown. Perhaps the confusion arises because Dublin – Kingstown was Ireland’s first railway (1834) I’ve also heard it described as one of Europe’s earliest commuter lines.
Kb2

decision-on-dun-laoghaire-baths-delayed
http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/decision-on-dun-laoghaire-baths-delayed-1599940.html
However, the Sandycove and Glasthule Residents’ Association circulated a newsletter at last night’s county council meeting, outlining their objections to the plans. The statement raised questions about the feasibility of creating a sand beach which could be washed away and said that development on the seashore would devastate the ecosystem.

“It is not relevant to the aspirations of the community,” the statement read. “There is no way to realise financially or practically the project.”

battle-in-polls-to-loom-on-public-baths
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/battle-in-polls-to-loom-on-public-baths-1598260.html
The latest report the 48th by the sub-committee received over 1,200 submissions from the public, including over 500 from the Save Our Seafront campaign, but rules out simply restoring the outdoor baths which one source described as a “sentimental connection to the past” which does not recognise the fact that people’s leisure habits have changed.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/public-baths-set-for-major–revamp-1599617.html
A committee of Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council has recommended the existing bath building be extended and revamped to provide a public swimming pool.

The move comes despite county manager Owen Keegan warning that such a facility, which would include outdoor swimming pool and the possibility of an indoor facility, was “unlikely to attract significant patronage and at best will operate for a very limited season”.

An analysis of submissions found that most people favoured neither one proposal nor the other, which consultants said was to be expected.

so it still crawling along and now a new set of plans…

Marine lake proposal scrapped
http://www.dublinpeople.com/content/view/1616/55/
A PROPOSAL for the construction of a marine lake in Dún Laoghaire Harbour has been abandoned after the Department of the Environment ruled that the development would conflict with a Special Protection Area for birds.
The proposal was mooted as a recreational facility, which together with the development of a marine activity centre at the back of the West Pier in the harbour, would have provided a range of activities including rowing, canoeing and sailing to the public.

councillors are a special breed of people aren’t they

joy as rusty pillars sculpture is pulled down
http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/towns-joy-as-rusty-pillars-sculpture-is-pulled-down-1718962.html

Critics of the sculpture have welcomed the moved with Fine Gael councillor Mary Mitchell O’Connor saying it had been “creating a sense of decay” in the seaside town.

Situated close to the Victoria Fountain and Dun Laoghaire/ Rathdown County Hall, the six metre high structure was made from corten steel which has a very rusted look.

It was also a frequent target for graffiti artists and some council members have continually fought for its removal for this reason.

“Given its prominence within a key public realm in Dun Laoghaire the choice of corten steel for the sculpture was a curious one, creating a sense of decay and contrasting sharply with the town’s rich Venetian architecture.”

so they didn’t like the rusty look and then it was painted and the still didn’t like it, do these not realise they living in harbour town?

http://www.dlrcoco.ie/gp/sculpt_press.HTM

http://www.flickr.com/photos/31238496@N04/3041396609/

i actually quite liked this piece and the backwards mentality of the councillors in this matter really annoyed me

Public opinion ‘ignored’ on baths plan
http://www.dublinpeople.com/content/view/1838/55/
DUN Laoghaire Rathdown County Council has been accused of ignoring public opinion following the recent adoption of its original proposals for a coastal enhancement scheme as an objective of the county development plan.

er i don’t quite get this but it seems that the council have voted in an old form of words into the general lap, which don’t take into the account the public submissions on their plans for the baths, but the council says this doesn’t really matter :/ hmmm

Anything stirrin’ on the DLR baths redevelopment debate?
Since the first proposal emerged in mid-2006 I’ve had a tenner riding on not even a sod being turned within 5 years. I’ve no fear of losing the bet, but haven’t seen/heard anything on the topic for quite some time.

Bit of work going on now – closure of the Dart line, and re-landscaping the “metals”

A great idea!

According to Irish Times report of 5th October there is a new proposal from DLRCoCo regarding the baths, though I can’t find anything on the DLRCoCo website.

Anyone got diagrams/more detail?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1005/1224280400887.html

“A €20 MILLION plan to develop public baths in south Dublin was unveiled to councillors yesterday.
The latest plan for Dún Laoghaire Baths outlined to councillors by officials of Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council included the conservation of the existing Edwardian pavilion and facade, and the construction of a breakwater.
It also included a plan to build a walkway linking Scotsman’s Bay and the east pier, a cafe, terraces and a spa facility.” (Irish Times)

A little more detail in the Southside People:

http://www.dublinpeople.com/content/view/3825/57/

@pico wrote:

A little more detail in the Southside People:

http://www.dublinpeople.com/content/view/3825/57/

On a quick read it looks like a more reasonable proposal. Is there still not a question as to whether the Council really has any money now to make it happen. I would love to see that area improved along these lines as the area as it stands is a sad indictment to our leaders over the last 20 (+?) years.