Hi,
I had a post up back in May about the need to open the Beverton/Ballisk Lane gate fully. There was quite a lot of comments on the post and a lot of people messaged me directly to discuss the need to have the gate opened from both a safety and convenience perspective.
With Local Elections due in June 2024, now is an excellent time to start a campaign on this important issue. Current and prospective councillors will soon be knocking on doors in Donabate to ask for your support come election time and as this gate effects thousands of residents, it would be great to see support from local representatives to have it removed.
To start with, I will be setting up a mailing list and Whatsapp group for anyone who is interested in being involved in having this gate removed permanently. Once we get a number of residents involved, we will then set up a local meeting to discuss the best way to have the gate removed.
You can email bevertongate2024@gmail.com with your number and location to be added into the groups and we will be in touch in the next few weeks.
Beverton Gate
Hi Bluezar ,
Firstly well said and we welcome your forthcoming campaign..
In order to have the gate issue finally resolved it definitely needs a root and branch change at local councillor level within the Peninsula.
That is the only solution from our knowledge and experience..
Our two local councillors in Donabate and Portrane have been practically useless on this issue for the last number of years and are happy to drag their feet and spoof on the doorsteps come election time and maintain the status quo for their own benefit.
Our two currently elected local councillors in Donabate / Portrane can vote to change this situation at any of the Fingal CoCo monthly meetings. One of these local councillors [ FF ] requested that this issue would not be raised in the Fingal CoCo chamber again and particularly at election times but Fingal CoCo deemed that proposal undemocratic. We at least applaud Fingal CoCo on that front.
Hopefully the Local Elections in June 2024 will flush out this present situation and bring much needed change to this issue and to the general wellbeing of the peninsula as a whole.
It only takes our two local councillors within Donabate / Portrane to agree and change will finally happen regarding the gate.
We know for a fact that Fingal CoCo would get rid of this gate " in the morning " if they could.
We have no doubt that a sustained campaign in numbers will finally address this ridiculous situation.
We fully support and are glad to help your campaign as per our attached Petition which has been ongoing for a number of years :
https://www.change.org/p/residents-of-b ... e-donabate
Firstly well said and we welcome your forthcoming campaign..
In order to have the gate issue finally resolved it definitely needs a root and branch change at local councillor level within the Peninsula.
That is the only solution from our knowledge and experience..
Our two local councillors in Donabate and Portrane have been practically useless on this issue for the last number of years and are happy to drag their feet and spoof on the doorsteps come election time and maintain the status quo for their own benefit.
Our two currently elected local councillors in Donabate / Portrane can vote to change this situation at any of the Fingal CoCo monthly meetings. One of these local councillors [ FF ] requested that this issue would not be raised in the Fingal CoCo chamber again and particularly at election times but Fingal CoCo deemed that proposal undemocratic. We at least applaud Fingal CoCo on that front.
Hopefully the Local Elections in June 2024 will flush out this present situation and bring much needed change to this issue and to the general wellbeing of the peninsula as a whole.
It only takes our two local councillors within Donabate / Portrane to agree and change will finally happen regarding the gate.
We know for a fact that Fingal CoCo would get rid of this gate " in the morning " if they could.
We have no doubt that a sustained campaign in numbers will finally address this ridiculous situation.
We fully support and are glad to help your campaign as per our attached Petition which has been ongoing for a number of years :
https://www.change.org/p/residents-of-b ... e-donabate
-
Mr. Stupid
- Posts: 777
- Joined: 15 Oct 2012, 11:54
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 25 times
Beaverton residents objected and got their way on that one.
-
topsyturvey
- Posts: 111
- Joined: 08 Mar 2013, 23:11
A small cohort with an agenda to do just that if I recollect. The walkway through the galleries would be a huge benefit to Beverton residents. - just as the walkways through Beverton from Beresford are to the residents of beresford.
Hi, I believe you are correct when you say we need a change of Councillors to act for ALL on the peninsula . One of our Councillors controls the Football, GAA and Hockey clubs and is only interested in pleasing these associations and it's members . Now the has the help of the FF dominated Donabate Portrane Community Council so he will have his way if re-elected.
The other Councillor only comes out at election times .We see a lot of him, but we don't see any action from him other than to report on what has been agreed by the FCC or recently on the Trad Fest in which he had no part to play
Come election time, vote for change. For decades now, FF have controlled all in the peninsula for the good of a few. Had our Councillors acted for the good of all on the peninsula when the LAP was a discussion document, Donabate would not be facing the level of development it will have to cope with.
It was pointed out years ago by 2030, Donabate will have the population of Naas around 20,000 people.. But unlike Nass we only have 1 supermarket (possibly 2 by 2020) no garda station, non existent transport ...... yes we do have a train station but can't get on the trains at peak times, we do not have an adequate number of places in schools, and no proper town centre , which should be on the DDR and not behind the train station... Everyone knows this more traffic in the centre of Donabate is not the solution...
We need to elect people who will be very vocal in FCC chambers on our behalf.. After all Tesco pay over € 1,000,000 per annum to FCC in rates, but we see only a pittance re-invested in our community.
The other Councillor only comes out at election times .We see a lot of him, but we don't see any action from him other than to report on what has been agreed by the FCC or recently on the Trad Fest in which he had no part to play
Come election time, vote for change. For decades now, FF have controlled all in the peninsula for the good of a few. Had our Councillors acted for the good of all on the peninsula when the LAP was a discussion document, Donabate would not be facing the level of development it will have to cope with.
It was pointed out years ago by 2030, Donabate will have the population of Naas around 20,000 people.. But unlike Nass we only have 1 supermarket (possibly 2 by 2020) no garda station, non existent transport ...... yes we do have a train station but can't get on the trains at peak times, we do not have an adequate number of places in schools, and no proper town centre , which should be on the DDR and not behind the train station... Everyone knows this more traffic in the centre of Donabate is not the solution...
We need to elect people who will be very vocal in FCC chambers on our behalf.. After all Tesco pay over € 1,000,000 per annum to FCC in rates, but we see only a pittance re-invested in our community.
I completely agree. We need a change of councillors ASAP. The fact that the Community Council has now been, more or less, taken over by FF is very bad news for the area.
On the issue if the gate it should be abolished and a 24 hour right of way established. If we can get a big attendance at the meeting in Keelings on 07 February it would help. I've attended several Community Council meetings and the turnout can be quite poor given the size of our population. People need to start attending meetings to air their views or nothing will change.
On the issue if the gate it should be abolished and a 24 hour right of way established. If we can get a big attendance at the meeting in Keelings on 07 February it would help. I've attended several Community Council meetings and the turnout can be quite poor given the size of our population. People need to start attending meetings to air their views or nothing will change.
-
DonabateLad
- Posts: 8
- Joined: 15 Apr 2024, 16:49
Sad to see Paul Mulville's motion at the recent area meeting being rejected by the majority of councillors (Incl. Labour & FF 
) for the complete removal of the gate. https://fingalcoco.public-i.tv/core/por ... code=en_GB At least it's now open until 12.30am but it should really be gone.
Full vote from the linked video...
Yes:
Paul Mulville (Social Democrats); Dean Mulligan (I4C): Karen Power (Green); Ian Carey (Green); Ann Graves (SF);
No: Tom O’Leary (Fine Gael), Darragh Butler (FF), Brian Dennehy (FF), Adrian Henchy (FF), Bridget Manton (FF), James Humphreys (Labour), Cathal Boland (Ind)
Abstain: Rob O’Donoghue (Labour), Joe Newman (Independent)
Absent:
Gráinne Maguire (Ind), Tony Murphy (Ind), Brendan Ryan (Labour)
) for the complete removal of the gate. https://fingalcoco.public-i.tv/core/por ... code=en_GB At least it's now open until 12.30am but it should really be gone.Full vote from the linked video...
Yes:
Paul Mulville (Social Democrats); Dean Mulligan (I4C): Karen Power (Green); Ian Carey (Green); Ann Graves (SF);
No: Tom O’Leary (Fine Gael), Darragh Butler (FF), Brian Dennehy (FF), Adrian Henchy (FF), Bridget Manton (FF), James Humphreys (Labour), Cathal Boland (Ind)
Abstain: Rob O’Donoghue (Labour), Joe Newman (Independent)
Absent:
Gráinne Maguire (Ind), Tony Murphy (Ind), Brendan Ryan (Labour)
I'm not sure that this is as clear as being set out here.
If you listen to the discussion on the motion, its clear that councilors who voted against it or abstained did so because they did not want to interfere with an already agreed process with Beverton/Ballisk Residents and FCC.
The motion Paul M put forward would have leapfrogged what had been agreed at a meeting with Beverton/Ballisk residents, FCC and elected councilors two weeks ago. The gate is there because councilors created this situation in the 1st place. It makes no sense to ask FCC to a meeting, agree something with all parties and then insist on ignoring it or bypassing it at a Council meeting.
I can understand wanting to get a date for the gate being removed but I'm not sure about his motion - it goes against what the residents actually recently agreed to with FCC. Was Paul not at the meeting? My understanding is that we agreed to a process to get the gate opened so surely we should see it through? Properly. So that its gone for good?
I think its very important to look at the actions of all the political parties not just in last few weeks but in the last few years - make your judgements on actual work done.
If you listen to the discussion on the motion, its clear that councilors who voted against it or abstained did so because they did not want to interfere with an already agreed process with Beverton/Ballisk Residents and FCC.
The motion Paul M put forward would have leapfrogged what had been agreed at a meeting with Beverton/Ballisk residents, FCC and elected councilors two weeks ago. The gate is there because councilors created this situation in the 1st place. It makes no sense to ask FCC to a meeting, agree something with all parties and then insist on ignoring it or bypassing it at a Council meeting.
I can understand wanting to get a date for the gate being removed but I'm not sure about his motion - it goes against what the residents actually recently agreed to with FCC. Was Paul not at the meeting? My understanding is that we agreed to a process to get the gate opened so surely we should see it through? Properly. So that its gone for good?
I think its very important to look at the actions of all the political parties not just in last few weeks but in the last few years - make your judgements on actual work done.
-
DonabateLad
- Posts: 8
- Joined: 15 Apr 2024, 16:49
Yes, and in that same video, Paul M talks about the potential roadblocks for the eventual removal of the gate, such as the lack of timelines within the outlined process, and that this motion would guarantee its removal. https://fingalcoco.public-i.tv/core/por ... code=en_GB. The next council make-up could have a very different view towards the gate prolonging the process further.Nelly wrote: ↑15 Apr 2024, 20:12 I'm not sure that this is as clear as being set out here.
If you listen to the discussion on the motion, its clear that councilors who voted against it or abstained did so because they did not want to interfere with an already agreed process with Beverton/Ballisk Residents and FCC.
The motion Paul M put forward would have leapfrogged what had been agreed at a meeting with Beverton/Ballisk residents, FCC and elected councilors two weeks ago. The gate is there because councilors created this situation in the 1st place. It makes no sense to ask FCC to a meeting, agree something with all parties and then insist on ignoring it or bypassing it at a Council meeting.
I can understand wanting to get a date for the gate being removed but I'm not sure about his motion - it goes against what the residents actually recently agreed to with FCC. Was Paul not at the meeting? My understanding is that we agreed to a process to get the gate opened so surely we should see it through? Properly. So that its gone for good?
I think its very important to look at the actions of all the political parties not just in last few weeks but in the last few years - make your judgements on actual work done.
Yes, as a resident nearby to the gate itself I've talked with many of the political actors involved and was glad to see someone finally button-up and put a motion forward to remove it. If we wait for a walkway into the Gallery, which is on land that the council doesn't even own, we'll be waiting until I'm 6-feet under.