Meeting with JimO’Callaghan – Friday 6th November

Have Your Say

Leave a Comment

Comments

    • Simon Coyle
    • 12th November 2020
    Reply

    I note the minutes of the meeting on 6 November with Jim O’Callaghan and other communications. Arising from same and the Associations support of the STC proposals for an Alternative and the Alternative Alternative plan the following are some of the observations/queries arise:

    1 what trials and studies did Samra carry out in respect of the disposition of Strand Road residents to the proposals which would have authoritatively informed them of the view of Strand Road residents? Can a copy of the trials/studies be released ?

    2 How did Samra conclude that the imposition of a cycleway plan which implies the suppression of the seaside footpath ( most used by pedestrians, joggers etc.,) would be in the best interests of Strand Road residents and the said users?

    3 on what basis did Samra conclude that a substantial further reduction in road space ( 2x 3 meter motor carriageways ) with no planned traffic restriction/curtailment running alongside a separate two way Cycleway would not unduly impact on the quality of the lived environment for Strand Road residents and the users of the Beach, Promenade and Nature Park?

    4 The STC plans which are supported by Samra imply the suppression of all landside parking on Strand Road. Where specifically does Samra propose that affected residents would park their vehicles? How are Home Help, Medical Assistance visits, deliveries of groceries, heating oil and such like to be accommodated in such circumstances?

    5 The STC plan ( ie., First Iteration ) proposes a solution which suggests the completion of a flyover from the Merrion Road to Strand Road through Merrion Hall. The implications of this for traffic volumes and frequency on Strand Road are appalling. On what basis could Samra, in discharge of its responsibility to residents of Strand Road see fit to associate itself with such a proposal?

    6 Does Samra recognise that Strand Road is as much a residential road as Park Ave., Sydney Parade, Tritonville or Serpentine on which families live and try to raise children ? How does Samra reconcile support for the STC proposals and its duty to the Residents of Strand Road with the implications of adopting the STC plans for residents of Strand Road?

    7 Does Samra consider Strand Road as a National Primary Road as opposed to its designation as a Regional Road ( R131 ) and hence has abandoned any effort to reduce/control the volume and nature of traffic using the road ( currently 20,000 vehicles per day ) ?

    8 Samra appears unwittingly or otherwise to have found itself or been placed in a position of conflict of interest. The legitimate views of Strand Road residents who see the Cycleway proposals as presented by DCC as potentially bringing long awaited benefits to the lived environment on the Road have been ignored in favour of support to other Sandymount resident groups. What Governance structures are proposed to deal with positions taken by the Association on behalf of members where such conflict does or could be perceived to exist?

    9 Did the Association financially support the preparation of the STC Alternative Plans?

    It would be great to receive clear and unambiguous responses to the foregoing.
    Kind regards
    Simon Coyle
    41 Strand Road
    Sandymount
    Dublin 4 D04 PX 93

JOIN THE FACEBOOK PAGE