Eamon De Buitlear opposing Hilltop Range's planning permission

pedroeibar1

For info.

50cal

So Eamon is happy with the constant racket from the clay shooting but he is objecting to some .22 rifle shooting?:mad:
Come on now Eamon give the club a break? Does he appreciate how little noise pollution emits from a small bore range?
Sounds like a case of the locals dragging in a heavyweight to do their dirty work for them.;)
Live and let live .I am open to correction but is the range in question not 100 mtrs anyway? and in fairness he doesnt let the lads shoot fullbore rifle outside for the last year or so.
Best of luck to you Pat and Marian.We are all behind you.:)

50cal

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

For info.

Has nobody a comment on this attack by Eamon de buitlear on this mans shooting range?:mad:
This might only be the start of it ?

Sparks

Probably needs a thread of its own 50. I'll move stuff around now, just give me a second.

cavan shooter

Not wishing to cause a row, but what do you want us to say, he has every right to object if he feels like it. It may seem silly to us but to Mr. De Buitlear he has an issue. Its retention as well, that is messy, know a ground that had to go through it and had to spend a lot of money to keep people happy in the end.

bunny shooter

He's as entitled as those in favour are to voice his opinions, we're supposed to live in a democracy after all

deeksofdoom

cavan shooter wrote: »

Not wishing to cause a row, but what do you want us to say, he has every right to object if he feels like it. It may seem silly to us but to Mr. De Buitlear he has an issue. Its retention as well, that is messy, know a ground that had to go through it and had to spend a lot of money to keep people happy in the end.

bunny shooter wrote: »

He's as entitled as those in favour are to voice his opinions, we're supposed to live in a democracy after all

I agree, planning is there for a reason, you apply for planning permission the council tell you what you can have then you go away and build it.

But from my experience you can build what you like after that and then apply for retention after this.... this imho is wrong!

He has every right to object. If someone decided to build a shooting range beside my house without any permission, I wouldn't be over the moon about it either.

Sparks

All that being said - and I kindof agree with the points on retention, it's definitely not ideal - I was reading some of the submissions in the last retention application Hilltop made and they don't really seem to make sense to me. I have family living close to the range (less than half a mile way from it), closer than some of those people who made submissions, and I've never once heard noise from the range while I've been there. While they've heard shotguns occasionally, one shot every 20-30 minutes doesn't sound like it's coming from the range - you'd expect that to be far more regular and for there to be far more shots fired. Maybe the acoustics are weird, I wouldn't want to say people were being untruthful without cause to do so, but it seems like the sort of thing that a proper environmental study should have cleared up. I know that when Rathdrum did theirs, there was no detectable noise less then 20 yards from the range itself even with all the firing points running (and I mean detectable now, not audible).

dCorbus

Has nobody a comment on this attack by Eamon de buitlear on this mans shooting range?

I'm sure we'd all have some comments to make on this "attack" by Eamon de Buitlear - But in fairness, the application for the retention was lodged back in February, the 5 weeks are up, and if it was anyone's intention to raise a bit of support (i.e. useful support, rather than just us all ranting amongst ourselves on here just to feel good), this should have been raised here within the statutory time limits to allow for letters of support to be submitted to the council. (If that would have been in accordance with Hilltop's wishes, in this case).

What Mr. de Buitlear has submitted is not an "attack", it's a submission to the planning authority with an observation in relation to an ongoing planning application - Which in fairness, the man is fully entitled to do, as those of us who might have supported Pat in this application would have been entitled to submit letters of support (if we'd been informed in time) - but in fairness, this is the first I've heard of this particular application and AFAIK it's the first mention of this on here, so your asking for comments (and/or support) after the horse has well and truly bolted is of no realistic use nor support for Pat. Maybe, the support of the wider shooting community could have been sought sooner?

He's as entitled as those in favour are to voice his opinions,

Unfortunately, that's the planning system within which we have to work!:( Would that it was otherwise.

a proper environmental study should have cleared up

The application for retention submitted a pretty extensive set of documents, with a specialist report in relation to noise levels. Keith has more than adequately boxed off most of the matters which might raise difficulties and the documents submitted are fairly comprehensive. The full planning submission and all the details of this retention application (Wicklow Co. Co. Reg. Ref. 114078) can be viewed online here: http://www.wicklow.ie/ePlan41/FileRefDetails.aspx?file_number=114078&LASiteID=0


Best of luck to Pat and I do hope that this application goes well for them.

sfakiaman

This all sounds like a very nice old gentleman was manipulated into making the objection, but it also points out the importance of complying with planning permission. If you develop without planning permission you're on the back foot straight away.

50cal

sfakiaman wrote: »

This all sounds like a very nice old gentleman was manipulated into making the objection, but it also points out the importance of complying with planning permission. If you develop without planning permission you're on the back foot straight away.

Thanks to Sparks for moving thread.
Look Lads I am former member at Hilltop but I just cant afford membership anymore.I just dont understand how de buitlear & co are against a 22 range?
Why didnt they object to his clay range years ago? or the pistol range ?
Surely the 22 range is the quieter of the bunch ? I know Pat is a bit rustic and he doesnt always do things according to the book but he is running a business in a difficult climate.
Dcorbus i wasnt aware of the retention application until I saw pedro's thread.sorry
I reckon sfakiaman might be on to something. de Buitlear was dragged onboard to catch Pat out:mad: