future of dublin bay

As far as I am aware, one is being orgainised by Ciaran Cuffe (8th April) of The Green Party and the other is being organised by the Save our Seafront group (1st April).

The Conference organised last Saturday (April 1st) by Save Our Seafront went well.

Next Saturday’s Conference (April 8th) in the Kingston Hotel on the waterfront in Dún Laoghairebetween 10am and 4pm which I’m organising will concentrate more on the architecture, design and future planning and management of the Bay.

Should we build a new town on the Poolbeg Peninsula? Can the South Port activities be moved to Fingal? What future for Blackrock and Dún Laoghaire Baths? Is the Bucholz | McEvoy scheme on the Rock Road too big / too small / not urban enough?

We have Dick Gleeson -Dublin City Planner speaking, as well as Michael Phillips, the City Engineer. Karin Dubsky from Coastwatch Europe will discuss Coastal Zone Management, Brian O’Brian from Solearth will give us his thoughts on future development. Michael Collins from the S2S Sutton to Sandycove cycleway proposal will tell us about how their plans are progressing. James Nix co-author of ‘Chos at the Crossroads’ will be there. The day will finish off with politicians from all Parties and the audience debating their visions for the Bay.

You can find out more and register online for free on http://www.DublinBayFutures.Org

Hope you can make it along.

Ciarán Cuffe TD, Green Party, Dún Laoghaire, MIPI, MRIAI

That is a very good line up of speakers,

I think that Dublin Bay has suffered greatly from a lack of joined up thinking on the development of Dublin Bay as an entity; issues such as Dun Laoghaire Baths, Bull Island reclamation and proposed Dublin Port extension really do need to be assessed in a wider context.

I hope that this platform provides a move in that direction.

Sounds like a very interesting conference Ciaran. Thanks for posting about it.

Phil

Lots of good speakers, ranging from Dick Gleeson -Dublin City Planner to Niall Hatch of Birdwatch Ireland, and after a decent debate the following ‘Declaration on Dublin Bay’ was agreed, and will be sent on to the various bodies. We’ll be posting the presentations on the http://www.DublinBayFutures.org website, once we’ve cleared them with the speakers.

Declaration on Dublin Bay

Recognising the environmental, historical, economic, and amenity value of the waters and lands surrounding Dublin Bay;

Acknowledging the improvements in water quality that have occurred in recent years due to investment in sewerage infrastructure;

Concerned at the pressures on the Bay from Dublin’s growing population, increasing port traffic, loss of green space, lack of baseline date, Climate Change, and ongoing development;

Aware of the lack of coordination and need for greater integration between the different remits and objectives of Dublin City Council, Fingal County Council, Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, Dublin Docklands Development Authority, Dún Laoghaire Harbour Company, Dublin Port, the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and other agencies;

Appreciative of the work undertaken by the Dublin Regional Authority in setting up a Dublin Bay Discussion Forum, and of the many voluntary bodies that have nurtured and protected the Bay over the years,

Resolves that:

-A statutory body be set up to co-ordinate, manage, develop and protect the waters and lands surrounding Dublin Bay;

– Greater provision and protection of the public amenities and biodiversity of the Bay, and access for recreational purposes is required;

– A building height and land-use master-plan be drawn up for the lands around Dublin Bay in partnership with the communities, general public and users of the Bay. This plan shall be developed in conjunction with a Coastal Zone Management Plan for the Bay that would protect the foreshore;

– Such plans shall be drawn up with full public participation as provided for under the Aarhus Convention.

Dublin Bay Futures Conference , Kingston Hotel Dún Laoghaire, 8 April 2006

A building height and land-use master-plan be drawn up for the lands around Dublin Bay in partnership with the communities, general public and users of the Bay.

Does this include the port?

Also, will the building height masterplan mean that the port – if it is to be moved and redeveloped – will go down the spencer dock route? i.e: Low-rent suburban business park architecture in the city

A building height and land-use master-plan be drawn up for the lands around Dublin Bay in partnership with the communities, general public and users of the Bay

Personally, I think the PD plan is better. Just build a spectacular high rise entrance to the Liffey and move the port to Balbriggan. Easy.

But we all know that PD’s will never do it as they are in coalition with a dominant partner who described one group of tall buildings as a ‘monstrosity’

Go figure

I was there for the afternoon part of the conference.

Michael Collins (a former councillor?) gave an entertaining presentation on the ‘Sutton-to-Sandycove’ cycle lane around Dublin Bay, saying why it is a good idea and why it is needed etc. But – the million dollar question – he didn’t say what stage it’s at now or when it would be likely to proceed. This project has been on the cards now for years – it’s badly needed. How much more ‘adopting’ does it have to go through?!

When Collins was finished speaking and questions were being taken, some guy erupted from the sidelines. I couldn’t really make him out very well but he seemed to be a Sandymount resident savagely opposed to creating any more promenade at Sandymount (like the 1km stretch that is already there). What was his point? Anyone know? Every city in the world has promenades / esplanades / walkways beside the sea. It is typically Irish that you should just have a vicious road and nothing else right beside the sea.

Sutton-to-Sandycove website:

http://www.s2s.ie/

Cute Panda and others who are salivating over the so-called “PD plan” for Dublin Port might like to expand their horizons a little. All this plan does is solve one perceived environmental problem by creating another (see http://www.bremorewatch.com).

In fact the PD plan is little more than a naive photoshop creation which crudely hijacked an idea from Finland where the Port of Helsinki is being shifted up the coast to Vuosaari. But there are staggering differences at Bremore (north Balbriggan) which don’t bear comparison with Senator Morrisey’s (PD) dimmer vision. For a start, there is an existing harbour structure at Voussari – an old badly polluted shipyard which is being expanded. There is nothing at Bremore where Drogheda Port has earmarked a potential port site because of deep water. An outer ring road terminates at Vousaari. Morrissey’s photoshop plan conveniently shows the proposed Dublin Outer ring road terminating at Bremore, a very wishful and not entirely accurate little piece of crystal ball gazing (the route of the outer ring road has not yet been determined – it could just as easily terminate at Drogheda – more likely).

At Vuosaari the Finns are putting in so many tunnels to protect local residents from noise and traffic that it puts the Port Tunnel in the shade (see http://www.bremorewatch.com). But Morrissey’s “plan” doesn’t advocate any of that. (His doppelganger, Gerry Duggan, who gave the PD presentation to a Dublin Bay conference I attended recently in the Gresham said that at Balbriggan we’re “used to that sort of thing”. I couldn’t believe my ears!).

There are also significant issues in area planning. A large segment to the SSW of the town has already been earmarked for commercial development but if the Bremore Port is also developed it will mean that Balbriggan is bearing far more than its fair share of this type of development.

Bremore is also an important archeological site which has not been fully excavated yet (9 local burial mounds), there’s a trout river which will be destroyed, the local coastline probably winters as many Brent geese and waders as Dublin Bay, we risk losing more sandy beaches than Dublin Bay, it’s closer to residential areas than the PDs like to pretend … I could go on and on.

See http://www.bremorewatch.com for more details.
Gerry Byrne

I should add that Dublin Port has no plans to move anywhere. This is all a figment of the PDs imagination.
Gerry Byrne

And has anyone considered the impact of converting Dublin Port into a 24 Hour Port? The proposals for Bremore are for 24 hour working but, with the exception of Ro-Ro ferries, Dublin Port mostly works 9 – 5. That means that trucks collecting container traffic spill onto the city streets at peak hours.

Ships and hauliers work 24 hours – why not Dublin Port? A switch to 24 hour working throughout would mean that Dublin could expand by upwards of 30% without needing to reclaim a single acre from the Bay and reduce traffic congestion at the same time because the trucks are spread out over 24 hours, not 8 as at present.
Gerry Byrne

I dont imagine for a minute that the creation of a new port at Bremore would not be fraught with problems but it should be considered as part of the greater plan. The creation of a new port could relieve both Dublin and Drogheda of their port activities and all the resultant traffic problems and loss of amenity these incur. It would make more logical use of the road structure that is developing in the region. The very fact that the outer ring road as not been decided is a positive thing as it allow new road development to be considered in tandem with land use. However undoubtably the North Dublin landscape would change, but its changing already. Balbriggan is no longer a pretty (was it ever) fishing village. The rise of the car-dependant suburbs will do as much to upset the important wading areas as will a new port. Better to have significant jobs closer to these areas then to drag everyone into Dublin.

Bremore is also not a figment of the PDs imagination. The development of a new port in North County Dublin has been bandied about for years. I agree though that it does seem like an odd policy statement from the PDs…not usually ones for visions, unless it concerns the taxcodes.

StephenC wrote:
“The creation of a new port could relieve both Dublin and Drogheda of their port activities and all the resultant traffic problems and loss of amenity these incur.”

I’m sorry but two wrongs don’t make a right. Is it fair to say that a port which may be a burden in one place is not a burden in another?

The prospect of moving Dublin Port has indeed been bandied about for years but by the same person. The PD plan was not written by Senator Morrissey but by Gerry Duggan, an engineer who had done a thesis in which he proposed relocating to Loughshinney. His idea was taken up by Frank MacDonald in the Irish Times who thought it was the greatest idea since the invention of ink. (McDonald is the same practical person who recently in the Irish Times aired the suggestion that Dublin Airport built it’s new runway in Portarlington!)

The Drogheda Port proposal is completely unneccessary as Drogheda Port has already re-located to a new wharf much closer to the mouth of the Boyne and which is miles away from Drogheda town. Bremore is instead driven by greed whereby the port is attempting to grab traffic already being handled by other East Coast ports.

And Dublin Port’s (and Dublin City’s) problems will be dramatically improved with the opening of the Port Tunnell. Also, if the Port switched to 24 hour working it could spread the existing traffic load throughout the day.
Gerry
See http://www.bremorewatch.com

PS: Take a look at the following URL and decide if Balbriggan is or isn’t pretty!
http://www.irish-architecture.com/building”s_ireland/dublin/balbriggan/index.html