Proposed coastal works as part of the redevelopment of Greystones harbour would not limit coastal erosion and may make existing erosion worse, it was claimed yesterday.
Speaking on the fourth day of the Bord Pleanála hearing into plans to develop 375 new homes and a new harbour with shops, a pub and a 230-boat marina, Fiachra Etchingham also claimed his fears about erosion had been mirrored in a written submission by the Department of the Marine.
Speaking on behalf of the Greystones Protection and Development Association, he also presented expert advice which sought to undermine projected traffic volumes put forward by the developer Sispar.
Sispar is a public-private partnership involving John Sisk and Company, Park Developments and Wicklow County Council.
Mr Etchingham criticised the council's involvement in the project, insisting the council, as planning authority, had effectively ruled out alternative, less intrusive proposals aimed at refurbishing the existing Victorian harbour.
He said the current proposal was not aimed at restoring the old harbour as a public amenity but demolishing it and replacing it with commercial facilities.
Commenting on the coastal defences proposed to protect the "soft" seashore, Mr Etchingham said it was intended to put in a rock barrier for 180m north of the development site on the existing North Beach. It was further proposed to place shingle as "nourishment" on further stretches of the beach for the next 30 years.
Mr Etchingham quoted the Wicklow County Development Plan, which argued that development should not take place within 50m from "soft" coastal areas. He also quoted EU and national policies which suggested the limit should be 100m.
"Coastal erosion has been a feature of the landscape for many years. However, the proposed development effectively creates a requirement for coastal protection because it puts a man-made development in an erosion-prone area."
Another difficulty was that the development's environmental impact statement (EIS) had acknowledged the new harbour would make erosion worse at mud cliffs at the base of Bray head.
Former town councillor Evelyn Cawley said this erosion would impact on protected areas of Bray Head which were defined as a Special Area of Conservation and a Natural Heritage Area. The development would impinge on a buffer zone for a proposed Special Area Amenity Order which was being formulated.
Eoin Reynolds, a chartered engineer, said the EIS had failed to assess the projected traffic volumes at morning commuter peak, but had chosen to assess them at a "local" peak hour from 9am to 10am. He also took issue with the developers' assertion that it was envisaged there would be "significantly-improved bus services", arguing that he was not aware of any such proposals.
