nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Save Our Seafront

Velvet Vocals

(Not sure if I'm posting in the right place so please mods, feel free to move)

Save Our Seafront has called a major public demonstration on Sunday May 15th to protest against the Council plans to build and 8-Story apartment block and shopping complex on the site of Dun Laoghaire Baths.
The protest was organised following a packed public meeting of over 200 local residents who agreed a major campaign of opposition to the council plans.

The huge development involves 180 exclusive apartments, 336 car spaces an da shopping complex. This will privatise a major section of the seafront, block the sea vies and destroy the unique seafront vista.

Save Our Seafront an dlocal residents are calling on councillors and TD'S to STOP these outrageous plans. We want the redevelopment of the baths as fully public seabaths and water amenity no more then 3 story's in height.

REASONS WHY YOU SHOULD JOIN THE PROTEST ON MAY 15TH

The council broke their promise to consult the public on the future for the baths and drew up these plans in secret

The council are spending your money sending 5 councilors and 5 officials to Bilbao to study their seafront! Yet they never bothered consulting local residents here about what we wanted

At over 200,00 sq feet, the 8 story apartment and shopping complex is bigger then the enormous B&Q warehouse on the M50!! It will destroy public sea-views and the unique coastal vista from Sandycove to the East Pier.

If they put high-rise private developments on the baths more will follow on Blackrock baths, The west pier, The Harbor Cottages, The Carlisle Pier, Sandycove baths, Bullock Harbor and Killiney Beach.

The Council say there will be a public water amenity underneath the huge apartment block but remember they also promised a skating rink on the Pavilion development and that never happened!

The scale of the development will cause further traffic chaos in Dun Laoghaire which already lacks a traffic management plan.

The councillors have the final say on this plan. We MUST put huge pressure on them and vote against these plans.

The seafront and baths belong to everyone. We should not have to had them over to private developers just to get a swimming pool built. If the council could afford to run the baths from the 1920's to the 1970's, they can afford to run them after 10 years of the "Celtic Tiger"

Contact your local councillors and TD's to protest and join the demonstration on Sunday May 15th - Assemble 2.30pm at rear entrance of Peoples Park, Dun Laoghaire. Bring Family, friends, neighbors and kids. Banners, placards, flags, whistles welcome

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Breezer

If the council could afford to run the baths from the 1920's to the 1970's, they can afford to run them after 10 years of the "Celtic Tiger"

From the 1920s to the 1970s, mobile phones did not exist, nor did iPODS. Having a TV in the house was the exception whereas having several (often equipped with digital technology) is now the rule. Electric showers were unheard of in the average Irish home. People did not go to the gym on a regular basis, nor was much attention put on healthy eating.

"After 10 years of the 'Celtic Tiger,'" Irish people regard themselves as more sophisticated than they did back then. Whether excessive technology, buff bodies and fad diets actually equal sophistication is not the issue. The point is that people see themselves as more sophisticated, and as such, expect more luxury.

No matter how many generations learned to swim in Dun Laoghaire Baths, today's generation of children and young people will not want to sit in an outdoor sea-bath, on a north-facing coastline, while they slowly surrender any feeling remaining in their blue-tinged limbs to the onslaught of the Irish climate.

From the 1920s to the 1970s, operating the sea-baths more or less involved sitting there and letting the sea do its work. Nowadays, operating a sea-baths will involve providing an indoor heated swimming pool to which people can retire (or run screaming to) on the odd occasion when the temperature falls belows 25 degrees. It involves providing some sort of café where people can sit and relax if they are to make a day out of the trip to the baths. It involves adhering to the strictest health and safety standards. It involves opening on public holidays (unlike Blue Pool) so that the public baths are available when the public are free to avail of them. It involves employing staff to see to all these things.

Don't get me wrong, I'm as pro-public amenities as the next man. I'm a supporter of the Green Party (although not of the Socialists or Richard Boyd-Barrett), and I'm happy to see Green Councillor Keelin Ireland actively involved in local issues. But let's be realistic. Running a baths that people will actually use costs money. In light of the council's habit of spending money on ridiculous projects such as the multiple versions of the Avondale Road cycle path, I would be intrigued to know where all this money will come from, if not from private investment.

saibhne

Hi Breezer,
you have got a point, I spent many a day in the DunLaoghaire Baths and didn't exactly have the most wonderful time due to the lack of amenity available - however Rainbow Rapids was a far more enjoyable experience. Having said that that I just can't accept the nature of the proposed development as it stands, a high rise luxury apartment block - it effectively tales publicly owned land and sells it to private parties, the ultimate benefit going to these private parties.
This is unacceptable, to me and many thousands of other residents of the borough, if I was to call it I would say that a majority of the residents were against this development. Another solution/type of development must be found, it just seems to me that the council hasn't gone far enough to meet the public need on this one. A little more resistance and a rising of the common voice and we just might get something that will benefit the public for a change.

Cheers,

S.

Breezer

I was wondering was anyone ever going to reply to this topic...

Anyway, to clarify: when I originally posted, I hadn't yet seen the actual artist's impressions of what the site would look like. Having seen them now, I have to admit that I don't like what I see - it reminds me of the Odyssey arena in Belfast, only that's in the middle of a roundabout in the city centre, not in a scenic area. I think that some effort could be made to tone the development in with the existing archetecture and perhaps it could be scaled down a bit.

With regards Rainbow Rapids, I'm too young to remember the baths particularly well, but I seem to remember Rainbow Rapids being shut down before the baths themselves? If memory serves me correctly, this was because they were deemed either unsafe or too expensive to run. Or both? I could be wrong, maybe someone whose memory stretches back a bit further could clarify this for me? But if this is the case, then the same situation would arise again if a new completely public development were put in place.

Which is why I think my point about the private element still stands: if the council attempts to fund this development on its own, we'll see yet another increase in bin charges, parking fees, etc. because the money has to come from somewhere. You may say the council is selling public land off to those few who can afford it and yes, it is, but it's a small section of public land (in fact, most of it is public water that isn't even used by anyone because it's inaccessible from the land). And isn't it better that those who can afford it fund this development rather than young families struggling to make ends meet? Or older people living off pensions?

Again, I stress that I'm not some right-wing business tycoon who'll profit from this, I'm an 18 year old resident of Dun Laoghaire. I want to see a development that I and people like me can avail of. But we need an element of realism here too.

Iago

I live in Dun Laoire and I'm not against this development, the world has to move on whether you like it or not and to be honest I would much rather see a seafront/marina/harbour area similar to Cape Town or indeed Syndey than what we have at present.

It's 8 stories, but at least 4 of those stories are going to be below ground level anyway, I think that the overall development of Dun Laoire harbour and surrounding areas is vital for the continued growth of the borough. More power to them, development is nessecery for continued growth. It'll make the place look tidier and remove some of the areas that the junkies like to congregate for their fix. In turn that will improve the look and safety of the area and will lead to a better quality of life for people living in Dun Laoire.

You've got to look at the bigger picture, Dun Laoire has barely changed in 20 years, it's past time at this stage.

saibhne

Good on ya Breezer,
In with your eyes wide open and I completely take your view that private investment may be needed to create anything worthwhile on this site. However, one of my big gripes with this is that no other ideas have been proferred by the council that examine less costly and less offensive alternatives. To be fair to Save our Seafronts, they have drawn up and submitted an alternative plan which involved a restaurant and water park etc.. which cost a fraction of the price and catered for the greater public, whether it is economically viable or not I don't know.
But the main problem I have with the proposed development is that the political process which created it is blatantly undemocratic.
It disregards all the previous research done by the council itself on what should be built on the shorefront -This is research (the Coastal development plan) that was commisioned so they could make an informed decision about what plans should be developed for this and other public sites around the seashore. The recommendations were (broadly) for public amenity with a maritime slant - residential private development was strongly opposed that close to the shore and yet the "best" plan we are offered is 8 stories of Apartments...
Related and as important is the precedent that is set by this development - should any any residential development be created on this site then the argument against any further private developments on other public sites in the locality is weakened to the point of ineffect - this could mean private devt on Blackrock baths, Bullock Harbour and Sandycove and the end to the seashore as we enjoy it, a public asset that is both unique and with great potential.
Bottom line for me is - this is public land, it's use should be first and foremost to the benefit of the public, all of us, to compromise on this principle compromises our democracy effectively transferring ownership of our and future generations' birthright to the highest bidder.

What do you think?

Cheers,
S.

saibhne

Hi Iago,
Was busy typing away when you posted there,
Sure, development is necessary but it's the nature of that development that must be measured, why settle for something that benefits only a few when if some effort is made (particularly by our council and elected reps) we may get something that is good for us all - I don't understand the logic of settling for second best??
Having lived in South Africa for a number of years, Cape Town is by far an example of this - only those in the higher regions of income and paying tourists would have the ability to make use of the beauty of their waterfront whilst only a mile further inland ordinary Capetonians trading in the city centre suffered from a lack of footfall and the area subsequently became rundown and more dangerous.
I agree that development would bring more people, regeneration and possibly safety but I would suggest that this regeneration is more necessary in Georges Street than on the Baths site.

Cheers,

S.

Thomond Pk

Iago,

I am always suspicious of people who use the phrase 'The World has to move on' I work in development and believe me when I say that not all development is good development. Why I get a pay check is because I advise clients on what is likely to clear the planning process, it is entirely subjective and one doesn't always get it right. My assessment of the DL baths project:

Architecture: Poor copy of schemes undertaken in Florida during the mid 1990's
Context: Vastly over-scaled in relation to a highly sensitive historical setting
Amentities: Good
Motivation: Its a rates and development levies play.

saibhne

Hi Thomond,
Sounds like you work in the architecture business - I'd be very interested in hearing what you would like to see on the Baths site? The only alternative plan I've heard about is the SOS idea, not saying that it's good or bad, just want to hear some different ideas...

Cheers,

S.

hatrickpatrick

The finalized version of the SoS idea was only drawn up last night, and we're now planning to get an architect to give us a drawing of what it should look like... We're not officially releasing the plan yet but I can tell you that it's sustainable, it has an approach to funding which, bizarrely, the council haven't even mentioned, and it's only 3 stories, 2 below road level, 1 above, with a viewing platform on top. Hardly taller than the existing building. Anyone who believes the councils lies about lack of funding needs to take a good look at this document when it's released, it lists 3 good sources of funding. It'll be released formally in about a week, I think.

And BTW, to everyone here who actually supports our campaign, expect a massive, massive protest march in September

Hatrickpatrick
--SOS comittee member---

Thomond Pk

Where are people standing on the split?

saibhne

Hi Thomoond,
Been out of the loop for a while and haven't heard of a split, any details?
Cheers!

S.

hatrickpatrick

"The split" wasn't really a split at all. 5 or 6 members of the SoS campaign walked out and formed a group called "conserve Dun Laoghaire". The group wrote one article and then just disappeared. I'm not sure how much info I can actually give out, but I'll at least tell you that the "split" wasn't as it seemed, the people who walked out had been disrupting the SoS meetings and taking actions which went against what everyone else in the SoS comittee wanted. They had also, apparently, been aggressive with people who wouldn't agree to sign the petition, and were on the verge of getting themselves kicked out. As you can see, they have written one article and vanished, while we are currently planning another major public march. Anyone can make baseless and unfounded accusations like they did, but it takes more than that to mobilize 5,000 people to march about such a sensitive issue.

BolBill

Personally that area could do with a shake up, so Im all for a shopping complex

Keeks

BolBill Banned from GI for trolling on multiple threads

Thomond Pk

Trolling green issues is getting ever more common in recent weeks; do I sense fear from certain quarters?