| Green light 16:27 - Jun 9 with 12884 views | TheArtChappy |
For the lagoon. Evening post have said can't link sorry |  |
| |  |
| Green light on 00:15 - Jun 12 with 2024 views | scottishjack |
Thanks...
Now is it just me, or does that article cover a lot of the points made on this thread? Not all of them, but a lot? |  | | |
| Green light on 07:41 - Jun 12 with 1992 views | raynor94 |
| Green light on 19:11 - Jun 11 by Scotia |
Sorry I missed this.
I would be 100% behind this if I thought the benefits would be realised. Why wouldn't I be?
I'm sick to the back teeth of us not getting any investment too. I honestly think this is why this is planned here first, because the company will hope we'll think something is better than nothing.
No perhaps in itself nobody really uses that part of the bay, but the water flows through it for most of the tidal cycle in the direction of Mumbles. Switch this off and you change everything in the bay at present.
Watersports etc - brilliant, so it will be just like living by the sea then? Nothing we can't do now. In fact everyone acknowledges Monkstone marina in the river Neath will be unusable due to silt. This will just replace what it destroys
Triathlons etc from the walking area - Will never happen, not a single one can ever be organised along the wall. This weekend is the Swansea Half, I'm doing it and I've trained hard for about two months. What if it was a little bit windy? And I just mean a force 3-4 at high tide the route would have to be changed, the roads could not be closed at such short notice. The event would have to be cancelled it would piss all the entrants off and nobody would enter another one.
Fishing - again, will never happen. The wall is 6 miles out to sea, we're not even allowed to fish on the East pier.
If the potential does get realised and more hotels are built for the visitors around the docks area these will probably just replace those on the sea front in Mumbles which will close because they will be overlooking mud flats where there used to be sand and nobody will fancy looking at that. That's if they don't get flooded out first.
I don't think you're being naïve, you've just swallowed up the PR. |
Worrying about a Mickey Mouse half marathon, and a bit of fishing? aye great reasons to stop some massive investment coming into the City, as I said earlier I think I'll take Terry Matthews advice over yours |  |
| |
| Green light on 08:47 - Jun 12 with 1973 views | perchrockjack |
Talking of marathons, not too late to sponsor my daughter ,Rhiannon, on just giving.
Its in a city that's like Swansea really, Marina, places to fish, boat repairs but people seem to like it and come in droves. Tomorrows event another one for large crowds,as was Tour of Britain, Three Queens visit, Tall Ships race; these things happen when a city gets noticed and this LAGOON WILL DO THAT | |
| |
| Green light on 10:02 - Jun 12 with 1954 views | ymaohyd |
| Green light on 19:11 - Jun 11 by Scotia |
Sorry I missed this.
I would be 100% behind this if I thought the benefits would be realised. Why wouldn't I be?
I'm sick to the back teeth of us not getting any investment too. I honestly think this is why this is planned here first, because the company will hope we'll think something is better than nothing.
No perhaps in itself nobody really uses that part of the bay, but the water flows through it for most of the tidal cycle in the direction of Mumbles. Switch this off and you change everything in the bay at present.
Watersports etc - brilliant, so it will be just like living by the sea then? Nothing we can't do now. In fact everyone acknowledges Monkstone marina in the river Neath will be unusable due to silt. This will just replace what it destroys
Triathlons etc from the walking area - Will never happen, not a single one can ever be organised along the wall. This weekend is the Swansea Half, I'm doing it and I've trained hard for about two months. What if it was a little bit windy? And I just mean a force 3-4 at high tide the route would have to be changed, the roads could not be closed at such short notice. The event would have to be cancelled it would piss all the entrants off and nobody would enter another one.
Fishing - again, will never happen. The wall is 6 miles out to sea, we're not even allowed to fish on the East pier.
If the potential does get realised and more hotels are built for the visitors around the docks area these will probably just replace those on the sea front in Mumbles which will close because they will be overlooking mud flats where there used to be sand and nobody will fancy looking at that. That's if they don't get flooded out first.
I don't think you're being naïve, you've just swallowed up the PR. |
Good luck with the half. Did it last year and annoyed at myself for not entering this year. Looks a better course than last, less mundane running around SA1.
I think the Swansea Half will grow and grow over future years. |  |
| |
| Green light on 10:25 - Jun 12 with 1938 views | yescomeon |
All that fluffy stuff is well and good but I'd be more interested to know what they have planned should beach nourishment be required, or a decommissioning plan should the lagoon become problematic. |  |
| |
| Green light on 10:36 - Jun 12 with 1930 views | Scotia |
| Green light on 19:46 - Jun 11 by londonlisa2001 |
The wall isn't 6 miles out to sea - it is 6 miles long.
But tell me this. If you are so against this project, what exactly do you want to see done to harness the commercial opportunity of the Bay? What other projects could generate commercial opportunities for this area given that you have said it's the only resource we have?
And you have said that you couldn't let your personal opinion affect the professional work you were doing on this? Well I don't understand. Either the project has a negative impact (in which case your professional reports should have mentioned that) or it doesn't (in which case your personal opinion is based on non factual information).
Finally, since the head of Swansea Bay is Terry Matthews who is an engineer, don't you think he would have said something if he thought this wouldn't do what it is supposed to do? Don't you think someone, somewhere, in the entire £1bn process, involving thousand of pages of reports, impact studies, engineering feasibility studies, environmental impact studies, tide modelling studies and so on and so on (the stuff that people like the Prudential probably wanted to see before lumping in £100m and the government wanted to see before giving it the go ahead to this stage), someone would have said, hang on a minute, this will flood Swansea and turn the bay into mudflats. I mean someone other than on a Swans football website? Or is everyone else involved in this entire project a complete idiot who believes the company's own website and doesn't ask for any independent backup? |
Ok, I suppose I meant that 6 miles of the wall is at sea. 3 miles may be the furthest point, the east pier is 1/3 of a mile, and is closed to the public. It is too exposed for anyone to safely visit in anything but the best of weather.
Ok, the bay needs to be better connected to a regenerated city centre. Swansea LDP is to be submitted toward the end of the year, lets see what's in it.
I'd say a couple of marquee attractions in the Marina / Museum / LC2 area such as a top quality "Wales national aquarium", an indoor surf pool like Surf Snowdonia and who knows why not a zip wire from the top of Kilvey hill?
A couple of few "garden" style bridges over mumbles road between SA1 and Mumbles to make the bay more accessible. Make the most of green infrastructure.
The towns main problem is the run down parts are well connected and the nice parts are separated by main roads or water. Separate the station, housing options, job centre and homeless hostels and the high street area will be nicer. Ideally moving the entire city centre to Parc Tawe to allow access to the Bay, the Old copper works, stadium and SA1.
The project has a negative impact. The reports mention it and because of them the requirements have been included. These are far reaching and do make the project more difficult, which is why the granting of the DCO is just the first hurdle.
I don't know what type of engineer is, he is obviously a very astute business man, however he has nothing to do with the lagoon really just the Swansea Bay region. I don't believe they have been made totally aware of the potential impacts, they certainly haven't been represented at the hearings.
Again, all of those impacts have been mentioned. They are available on the PINS website, not just from me on Planet Swans. If you have a look on other water sport forums you will see that support isn't totally universal.
As I said earlier, they have been taken seriously because they are in the planning requirements which are pretty testing.
I don't think Prudential have actually stumped up any money yet. | | | |
| Green light on 11:21 - Jun 12 with 1912 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Green light on 10:36 - Jun 12 by Scotia |
Ok, I suppose I meant that 6 miles of the wall is at sea. 3 miles may be the furthest point, the east pier is 1/3 of a mile, and is closed to the public. It is too exposed for anyone to safely visit in anything but the best of weather.
Ok, the bay needs to be better connected to a regenerated city centre. Swansea LDP is to be submitted toward the end of the year, lets see what's in it.
I'd say a couple of marquee attractions in the Marina / Museum / LC2 area such as a top quality "Wales national aquarium", an indoor surf pool like Surf Snowdonia and who knows why not a zip wire from the top of Kilvey hill?
A couple of few "garden" style bridges over mumbles road between SA1 and Mumbles to make the bay more accessible. Make the most of green infrastructure.
The towns main problem is the run down parts are well connected and the nice parts are separated by main roads or water. Separate the station, housing options, job centre and homeless hostels and the high street area will be nicer. Ideally moving the entire city centre to Parc Tawe to allow access to the Bay, the Old copper works, stadium and SA1.
The project has a negative impact. The reports mention it and because of them the requirements have been included. These are far reaching and do make the project more difficult, which is why the granting of the DCO is just the first hurdle.
I don't know what type of engineer is, he is obviously a very astute business man, however he has nothing to do with the lagoon really just the Swansea Bay region. I don't believe they have been made totally aware of the potential impacts, they certainly haven't been represented at the hearings.
Again, all of those impacts have been mentioned. They are available on the PINS website, not just from me on Planet Swans. If you have a look on other water sport forums you will see that support isn't totally universal.
As I said earlier, they have been taken seriously because they are in the planning requirements which are pretty testing.
I don't think Prudential have actually stumped up any money yet. |
You keep missing the point.
You say - they are not doing this. So I say - well why hasn't anyone else picked it up. Then you say - we did and it is in the requirements. So it ceases to be an issue then doesn't it?
If the stuff you have mentioned is part of the planning requirements which you describe as 'pretty testing' then without those being addressed it won't get built. And if they are addressed, then your concern disappears.
So you are complaining about what would have happened without the very detailed process which is always done in these cases. The fact that the company wouldn't have done it without these requirements is the whole point of the process. You seem to be using this though to say the whole thing shouldn't happen, and yet, it is what happens in every single major project. No company does the bits that they don't have to - it's called making as much money as they can.
And the funding is all committed - obviously subject to permissions etc. Again - that is what always happens. You have said that you have experience in these types of projects and yet you don't seem to realise that this is the way the process works - up and down the country this is what happens.
I'm not against the things you mention - they are good ideas, garden bridges, aquarium and so on. That is why they are mentioned in the plans that we have all seen before. But it is large infrastructure that actually brings in money to an area, not bridges, which will look great, don't get me wrong, but don't help the economy even slightly. Neither will zip wires - these are things to attract tourists but are not done in place of infrastructure but as well as.
I suspect that you have a fishing / surfing interest here which has nothing to do with whether the plans are great for the city, and more to do with whether you can fish off a certain place the way you want to. Well I'm afraid that if a project brings in money to the city, and puts it on the world map (as this will), then you can do your fishing somewhere else in my view.
Enjoy the Swansea half - great event and I know loads doing it this time. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Green light on 11:27 - Jun 12 with 1907 views | raynor94 |
| Green light on 11:21 - Jun 12 by londonlisa2001 |
You keep missing the point.
You say - they are not doing this. So I say - well why hasn't anyone else picked it up. Then you say - we did and it is in the requirements. So it ceases to be an issue then doesn't it?
If the stuff you have mentioned is part of the planning requirements which you describe as 'pretty testing' then without those being addressed it won't get built. And if they are addressed, then your concern disappears.
So you are complaining about what would have happened without the very detailed process which is always done in these cases. The fact that the company wouldn't have done it without these requirements is the whole point of the process. You seem to be using this though to say the whole thing shouldn't happen, and yet, it is what happens in every single major project. No company does the bits that they don't have to - it's called making as much money as they can.
And the funding is all committed - obviously subject to permissions etc. Again - that is what always happens. You have said that you have experience in these types of projects and yet you don't seem to realise that this is the way the process works - up and down the country this is what happens.
I'm not against the things you mention - they are good ideas, garden bridges, aquarium and so on. That is why they are mentioned in the plans that we have all seen before. But it is large infrastructure that actually brings in money to an area, not bridges, which will look great, don't get me wrong, but don't help the economy even slightly. Neither will zip wires - these are things to attract tourists but are not done in place of infrastructure but as well as.
I suspect that you have a fishing / surfing interest here which has nothing to do with whether the plans are great for the city, and more to do with whether you can fish off a certain place the way you want to. Well I'm afraid that if a project brings in money to the city, and puts it on the world map (as this will), then you can do your fishing somewhere else in my view.
Enjoy the Swansea half - great event and I know loads doing it this time. |
That last paragraph sums him up perfectly, Lisa | |
| |
| Green light on 11:38 - Jun 12 with 1898 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Green light on 11:27 - Jun 12 by raynor94 |
That last paragraph sums him up perfectly, Lisa |
Well I know that one of the only strong objections have come from the fishing club!
Don't get me wrong - if people want to do their fishing that's great (obviously, being female I have never understood it, as women and fishing don't seem to go together very often, much to the joy of the men I suspect) but as a city we can't put that sort of stuff before the economy.
I'm just thrilled that finally we seem to be at the forefront of something big and although I wouldn't want it to happen if it ruins the bay, I would like to find every possible solution to allow it to happen. | | | |
| Green light on 13:07 - Jun 12 with 1866 views | Scotia |
| Green light on 11:21 - Jun 12 by londonlisa2001 |
You keep missing the point.
You say - they are not doing this. So I say - well why hasn't anyone else picked it up. Then you say - we did and it is in the requirements. So it ceases to be an issue then doesn't it?
If the stuff you have mentioned is part of the planning requirements which you describe as 'pretty testing' then without those being addressed it won't get built. And if they are addressed, then your concern disappears.
So you are complaining about what would have happened without the very detailed process which is always done in these cases. The fact that the company wouldn't have done it without these requirements is the whole point of the process. You seem to be using this though to say the whole thing shouldn't happen, and yet, it is what happens in every single major project. No company does the bits that they don't have to - it's called making as much money as they can.
And the funding is all committed - obviously subject to permissions etc. Again - that is what always happens. You have said that you have experience in these types of projects and yet you don't seem to realise that this is the way the process works - up and down the country this is what happens.
I'm not against the things you mention - they are good ideas, garden bridges, aquarium and so on. That is why they are mentioned in the plans that we have all seen before. But it is large infrastructure that actually brings in money to an area, not bridges, which will look great, don't get me wrong, but don't help the economy even slightly. Neither will zip wires - these are things to attract tourists but are not done in place of infrastructure but as well as.
I suspect that you have a fishing / surfing interest here which has nothing to do with whether the plans are great for the city, and more to do with whether you can fish off a certain place the way you want to. Well I'm afraid that if a project brings in money to the city, and puts it on the world map (as this will), then you can do your fishing somewhere else in my view.
Enjoy the Swansea half - great event and I know loads doing it this time. |
I can understand your point, but I don't think it does cease to be an issue. The requirements DECC have put in place are to mitigate negative impacts, aswell as trying to prevent some occurring. These impacts are only estimated by a model - what if this model has underestimated impacts?
Besides what can be done to re-instate the tidal flow in the bay? I do think they are significant barriers to construction though.
A bit like the offshore visitor centre, they have been forced to include it even though they had no intention to. What if the very challenging environment 3 miles out in to the exposed ocean makes it cost - prohibitive, they can't at that point take the lagoon wall away.
The lagoon company have only very recently admitted there will be any impact at all, hence the section 106 agreement which I think was agreed in May. Throughout the process they have revered to some parts of the project as "enhancements" rather than "mitigation" because there were no negative impacts to mitigate against.
I only have experience in the planning side of these projects, plus Coastal Process knowledge. As I understand though the funding is in place subject to the strike price.
You are right about infrastructure, but it's not the be all and end all. Look at somewhere like Bournemouth or Torbay - no major infrastructure but have made the best of their sea front location. Besides I really don't think this will be especially impressive to attract investment, certainly nothing like the website video.
Swansea is on the world map, thanks to the football team, this may give us some exposure but if they get built elsewhere it won't be unique.
I do go fishing now and again if the weathers nice, never in that area though. It won't affect that at all. It wouldn't negatively affect my running either. I genuinely am just a concerned Swansea resident.
Thanks I'm really looking forward to it. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
