Owen Keegan is circling the wagons

• Owen Keegan was aware of the growing local opposition to DLRCOCO proposed Monkstown Ring Road (MRR).
  
• Owen Keegan took the unprecedented action of removing the DLRCOCO vote for the proposed MRR from September 11th meeting and moving the vote on to October 09th
  
• Owens Keegans sole purpose in doing that was to gain sufficient time to reinforce his case to have the October 09th vote passed.
  
• Owens Keegan is hoping to reinforce his case for DLRCOCO councillors to pass the vote October 09th.
  
• Owens Keegans is to try to convince DLRCOCO councillors of the validity of this road, the positive impact it will have to traffic in the area and how urgent is to do this right now.
  
• Owen Keegan will try in no uncertain terms to rubbish An Bord Pleanala’s Inspector’s decision that the road should not go ahead.
  
• Owen Keegan is unlikely to mention that the true figure for vehicle usage in year 1 will be 30,000 vehicles per day (1 vehicle every 2.8 seconds)
  
• Owen Keegan is unlikely to mention the danger to the children and the community by allowing 30,000 vehicles cut thro the settled suburban estates.
  
• Owen Keegan is unlikely to mention the Air pollution churned out by 30,000 vehicles per day.
  
• Owen Keegan is unlikely to mention the impact to local health by such pollution.
  
  
  Owen Keegan is unlikely to mention that An Bord Pleanala’s Inspector said “ I consider that the EIS was significantly deficient in terms of its analysis of the impacts of the proposed road scheme on human beings….the claimed benefits for the proposed scheme are not proven, while the dis-benefits to the community are evident”.
  
  Owen Keegan is unlikely to mention that An Bord Pleanala’s Inspector said “having considered the entirety of the documentation I am fully satisfied that the proposed scheme would lead to severe and adverse impacts on the residential amenities of the residential communities alongside it”.
  
  Owen Keegan is unlikely to mention that An Bord Pleanala’s Inspector said “I conclude that the examination of alternatives in the EIS was inadequate, and inconsistent with the overall analysis of the impacts of the development as a whole. This of itself is sufficient reason for the Bord to refuse approval of the proposed scheme”.