daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > Irish Architecture Forum > Republic of Ireland

Republic of Ireland For projects and construction in Dublin and the South



Reply

 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average.
Old September 9th, 2009, 07:00 PM   #1
odlum833
Registered User
 
odlum833's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 8,382
Likes (Received): 605

Dublin Port plans to take 52 acres from Dublin Bay

Dublin Port is ready to start it's infill of a part of the bay as soon as planning permission is granted.



This highly controversial scheme is now before An Bord Pleanála.


Quote:
Port company defends infill plan
TIM O'BRIEN

Dublin Port Company does not propose a major infill of Dublin Bay – the proposal to reclaim 52 acres in the vicinity of the north docks and Clontarf, “represents just 0.38 per cent of the total area of the Bay” the Port Company told Bord Pleanla today.

Addressing an oral hearing into the Port Company proposals, chief executive – Enda Connellan said Dublin Port was “of national significance and of key importance to the achievement of a competitive, dynamic and efficient economy”.

Mr Connellan said the port company throughput accounted for more than €35billion of the State’s trade in 2008. However he said capacity was a crucial factor and the port needed deeper berths to accommodate bigger ships.

He said the proposed expansion would allow for an increase of up to 50 per cent in capacity for unitized containers which was crucial to the national economy.

He maintained economic GDP activity in the State would return to “a more sustainable growth rate of 3.5 percent per annum” by 2011 and he calculated that unitized container traffic through the port would then be growing at a rate of about 4.5 percent per annum

The application is however being opposed by a range of environmentalists, public representatives and residents in the Clontarf and wider Dublin Bay area who point out that alongside the 52 acres of infill, Dublin Port requires at least that much area again, for pontoons, constant dredging and ship movements in the vicinity of the proposed infill.

Objectors An Taisce, Dublin Bay Watch and Clontarf residents association told the opening of the inquiry today that the development was in breach of a number of EU directives

Irish Times

Quote:
Economic arguments should not be part of port inquiry
- The Irish Times, 4th September 2009

Economic arguments at the core of the Dublin Port Company’s plans to infill 52 acres of Dublin Bay may not be considered by a planning inquiry into the project, An Bord Pleanála was told yesterday.

The board’s fast-track strategic infrastructure division is hearing an application by the port company for planning permission for the infill, which it said would increase unitised container traffic through the port by up to 50 per cent. The company said the expansion would be necessary to provide deep-water berths for larger ships, and was central to the economic prosperity of the State.

However, speaking at the opening of the An Bord Pleanála oral hearing into the application yesterday, barrister Donall O’Laoire said the area in question was in the process of being designated as a special protected area under the EU Birds Directive.

Mr O’Laoire, who represents Dublin Bay Watch and the Clontarf Residents Association, both of which oppose the plans, said the European Court had ruled that in circumstances where areas were candidates for protection, legislation from the birds directive applied. “This directive specifically states that economic and recreational arguments are not admissible,” he told An Bord Pleanála senior planning inspector Brendan Wyse. Mr O’Laoire was supported by barrister Ian Lumly of An Taisce, who said there were two further potential legal challenges to the inquiry.

Firstly, questions arose “over the validity of the entire hearing” because of what he maintained were deficiencies in relation to the environmental impact assessment. Secondly, the port company had refused to divulge information on the carbon emissions of the proposed development, contrary to a European directive.

Mr Wyse said he had taken the comments of both barristers into consideration and time could be allocated in the hearing to listen to full submissions on the topics raised.

The inquiry continues.



This application, whilst it has considerable merit, to my mind it contradicts the long term plan to completely move the port.
__________________
Ireland forum is here

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=1596

Last edited by odlum833; September 9th, 2009 at 07:09 PM.
odlum833 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old September 18th, 2009, 06:48 PM   #2
spacetweek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Dublin
Posts: 328
Likes (Received): 19

I find it hard to understand how there can be an environmental aspect to this. We're talking about an area of open water, it's not shallow enough to be a breeding ground.

As for moving the port, if they add this land, it will just provide more land for building city-centre housing, which is a good thing. We need Dublin to turn inward in the future for residential expansion, instead of adding new housing to the outskirts.
spacetweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 2nd, 2010, 09:24 PM   #3
PeteC
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 156
Likes (Received): 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by spacetweek View Post
As for moving the port, if they add this land, it will just provide more land for building city-centre housing, which is a good thing. We need Dublin to turn inward in the future for residential expansion, instead of adding new housing to the outskirts.
I agree with spacetweek about future expansion but there are some very good reasons for keeping the port where it is;

Quote:
Dublin Port’s shallow grave? - Sunday Business Post
Sunday, June 24, 2007 - By Richard Curran
Given that half of all Dublin Port trade is within the M50, if a new port was built outside it, half the material bound for the port would have to come all the way back in.

Dublin Port Company owns 50 per cent of Greenore Port in Co Louth, along with On€51. Dublin Port has tried moving some of its liquid and dry bulk products, such as cars, up to Greenore, a deeper port. This, however, has not been too successful. Importers and exporters want to stay in Dublin.

It might be a little strange to consider moving the port shortly after completing an €800million Port Tunnel specifically designed for trucks.
Quote:
Bremore is a deep water facility 3 km north of Balbriggan which is being developed by the Drogheda Port Company, with capital from Treasury Holdings. The Dublin Port Company and the Drogheda Port Company are both owned by the State. The government should direct the Dublin Port Company to enter into a joint partnership with the Drogheda Port Company, and to use the money earmarked for the Clontarf reclamation for the development of Bremore. It should also state that the container traffic now using Dublin Port be routed through Bremore.
Surely Bremore is the best compromise, goods destined for the city centre could use the Port Tunnel and all other goods can be brought onto the M1 and to their final destination from there. Ferrys and cruise liners could be retained at Dublin port and the remaining area could be developed.
PeteC no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2010, 12:38 PM   #4
RubaDub
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 37
Likes (Received): 0

ABP has rejected the plans:

Quote:
Dublin Bay infill plan rejected
Wednesday, 9 June 2010 11:15

An Bord Pleanála has rejected the Dublin Port Company's application to infill and develop over 95 acres of the inner bay of Dublin - a decision which will cost the company €155,456 in planning fees.

In its decision, the Bord said part of the development would have taken place inside a special area of conservation under the EU Birds Directive and would involve the permanent loss of wetland habitat.

The announcement has been welcomed by Chair of Dublin Bay Watch, Cllr Gerry Breen.
Advertisement

He said he hoped this would mark the end of what he termed the '40-year-old folly' of the Port Company attempting to fill in the bay.

The Port Company's application, lodged in August 2008, had been considered by the Bord as a strategic infrastructure development.

An Bord Pleanála refused the development on four grounds, but declined to accept its own inspectors' recommendation to refuse permission on several other points, including the unacceptable risk of flooding of the Clontarf area.
RTE
RubaDub no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2010, 06:53 PM   #5
nordisk celt83
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oslo, Norway and Enniskerry, Wicklow
Posts: 1,028
Likes (Received): 32



Great news. Now hopefully Dublin Port will get a move on and up sticks to Bremore!!
nordisk celt83 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu