Sandymount Strand housing plan: Public reaction

‘People would be really unhappy about that happening here’

Walkers on Sandymount Strand: Building in scenic natural areas like Sandymount Strand, before using unused land further inland, was heavily criticised. Photograph: Nick Bradshaw

Walkers on Sandymount Strand: Building in scenic natural areas like Sandymount Strand, before using unused land further inland, was heavily criticised. Photograph: Nick Bradshaw

 

People basking in the sunshine at Sandymount Strand at the weekend were united in their opposition to the idea of turning the seaside over to housing.

“I understand there’s a housing crisis at the minute, I’m in one myself, but I don’t think I would agree to put the property right here at sea,” said Paula Wallace from Kimmage.

“It would definitely take away from the scenery and just the community and the public in general . . . It’s really nice to see everybody when the weather is good. It would totally take away from the area. I’m sure there’s much more concrete places in the area to build.”

Dermot Roughneen from Sandymount wondered how the area would cope with extra traffic from any new development.

“The traffic is horrendous as it is,” he said. “It just seems to be getting worse and worse.”

Local opposition to the plan would be vehement, he said. “There certainly won’t be any houses built anywhere near the promenade here,” he said. “There’s a lot of very important people living in various places along here. They’d be digging in their heels.”

Róisín Murphy from Ballsbridge agreed. “People would be really unhappy about that happening here.”

Katrina O’Sullivan from Kilmainham said there would probably be concerns over the design of any new suburb. “Even with the housing crisis, I don’t think it would go over well,” she said. “”I mean if it was well designed, that’s one thing, if you’re going to put a big glass building like [the incinerator] over there, they wouldn’t like it.”

Building in scenic natural areas like Sandymount Strand, before using unused land further inland, was heavily criticised.

“There are so many other areas they could do it without ruining this area,” said Gemma Carroll of Glasnevin. “It seems like they’re going for the natural places, when there are lots of areas that are not being developed that should be more inland. Just not near parks and natural areas.”