Limerick Northern Distributor Road Plan

zulutango

phog wrote: »

Or maybe roads like that are meant to assist the people that want to live in areas like greater East Clare area, Shannon, Sixmilebridge, Cratloe, Meelick, Parteen, Clonlara, O'Brien's Bridge, Caherdavin, Moyross, Corbally, Annacotty and Castletroy.

Personally I'd love to live in West Clare. Perhaps we should extend the motorway to Doonbeg? My commute would be 40 minutes. Very doable.

Vanquished

phog wrote: »

Or maybe roads like that are meant to assist the people that want to live in areas like greater East Clare area, Shannon, Sixmilebridge, Cratloe, Meelick, Parteen, Clonlara, O'Brien's Bridge, Caherdavin, Moyross, Corbally, Annacotty and Castletroy.

All well and good if you have an effective and well developed planning strategy. Sadly we have an incoherent, dysfunctional and often shambolic planning system in this country. We're still granting permission for a few thousand one-off houses down boreens every year. This is continuing to erode the viability or rural towns and villages and is resulting in far greater and longer trips from rural townlands in to local towns and in this case Limerick city. This simply fuels demand for yet more roads to facilitate such journeys.

We know that uncoordinated and dispersed settlement patterns makes it far more difficult and costly to deliver infrastructural services. If we could somehow promote the concentration of development in villages, towns and cities and introduce strict planning restrictions on one-off dwellings. Then we wouldn't need to be so concerned about projects such as this distributor road exacerbating and facilitating more rubbish and brainless planning policies and deveopment!

Insect Overlord

Sounds a bit dystopian Communist, to be honest. It's only a few steps away from saying we should all be living in high rise buildings in minimalist cells/small apartments, without our own choice of transport or property, and the countryside kept exclusively for agriculture.

zulutango

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Sounds a bit dystopian Communist, to be honest. It's only a few steps away from saying we should all be living in high rise buildings in minimalist cells/small apartments, without our own choice of transport or property, and the countryside kept exclusively for agriculture.

Eh, no .. no, it's not. It's about being sensible with the resources we have and aiming for a high quality of life for everybody. Would you describe Europe or the UK as dystopian Communist?

I can't believe you're honestly making the argument that having sensible planning laws is a few steps away from a dystopian Communist society. FFS. Are you Eamon O'Cuiv by any chance?

Vanquished

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Sounds a bit dystopian Communist, to be honest. It's only a few steps away from saying we should all be living in high rise buildings in minimalist cells/small apartments, without our own choice of transport or property, and the countryside kept exclusively for agriculture.

Absolute rubbish! We're almost unique in Europe in permitting such uncontrolled, dispersed development in rural areas to the detriment of local villages and towns. It's laughably hypocritical too when you consider Ireland likes to promote itself as a land of unspoiled, natural lanscapes. Yet we continue to pepper the countryside with ever bigger and more elaborate McMansions!

Insect Overlord

So the solution is to move everybody into towns and cities, pedestrianise the city centres, stop building roads, and invest in self-driving cars? All in the middle of a rent crisis and a housing shortage?

topper75

zulutango wrote: »

... not good because of the inherent inefficiency and high cost of provision of services...

And if that cost is gladly borne by those who choose to live outside suburbs?

Most people who live beyond the city did so after weighing up the pros and cons.

The place I work is souless. I certainly wouldn't want to live there. I didn't choose the site. I do however have choice over where I live.

The communist dystopia referred to was actually under our noses in Shannon town, a place where concrete went to die and would not have appeared odd east of the Caucusus. Planned by people who thought life was just a house and work and nothing more. Only in recent years has that been somewhat remedied and human spirit triumphed to create some semblance of a normal community. Say what you want about O Cuiv et al but at least they understand that is not the way for Ireland to go.

Let's not go down this path of pretending we are European and that what works for them works for us. It is as daft as the Chinese single time zone.

zulutango

topper75 wrote: »

And if that cost is gladly borne by those who choose to live outside suburbs?

Most people who live beyond the city did so after weighing up the pros and cons.

The place I work is souless. I certainly wouldn't want to live there. I didn't choose the site. I do however have choice over where I live.

The communist dystopia referred to was actually under our noses in Shannon town, a place where concrete went to die and would not have appeared odd east of the Caucusus. Planned by people who thought life was just a house and work and nothing more. Only in recent years has that been somewhat remedied and human spirit triumphed to create some semblance of a normal community. Say what you want about O Cuiv et al but at least they understand that is not the way for Ireland to go.

Let's not go down this path of pretending we are European and that what works for them works for us. It is as daft as the Chinese single time zone.

If the true cost of living in one-off settlements is borne by those who live there, then I think that's perfectly fair. However, I think you'll find that very few people can actually afford the true cost. The current situation is that urban taxpayers effectively subsidise the lifestyles of those who live rurally, which isn't fair at all.

I think you make a fair point about the likes of Shannon. This certainly is not the solution. Well designed, attractive villages, towns and cities with plenty of leisure amenities and with good transport links between them is the sensible way forward. One-off housing or soul-less, identikit, sprawling suburban housing estates create vast problems for society and they should not be permitted. If you are interested in this area, and open to changing your mind, then I'd recommend reading a book called 'Happy City' by Charles Montgomery.

marno21

There is currently a lack of road infrastructure in the north eastern quadrant of Limerick city considering it's home to a major university and several large employers. Its only decent road is the Dublin Road, a single carraigeway with plenty of roundabouts and busy junctions, and it has one connection to the motorway network.

It needs something more than this. This isn't a road to enable car based commuting/extra car use, it's to cater for existing needs.

bazz26

zulutango wrote: »

If the true cost of living in one-off settlements is borne by those who live there, then I think that's perfectly fair. However, I think you'll find that very few people can actually afford the true cost. The current situation is that urban taxpayers effectively subsidise the lifestyles of those who live rurally, which isn't fair at all.

I find that statement to be very arrogant, inaccurate and typical view of someone who doesn't see anything beyond the concrete pale. Go experience living outside a city and see how things work out there. People who live outside urban concrete, glass and steel sprawl have to pay for things that are already provided for in urban areas.

If you're going down the road of claiming whose tax is subsidising what, then look no further than the motorist who is the one being ridiculed in this thread, is of the most taxed groups and source of revenue for the government in this country for decades.

Here is a breakdown of what motorists pay in tax:

VAT on vehicle purchase,
VRT registration tax on vehicle purchase which already includes VAT,
Motor tax,
VAT on vehicle insurance,
Government levy on vehicle insurance,
Toll fee (including ,
NCT fee (includes VAT),
VAT on fuel,
Excise Duty on fuel.

That is a large proportion of tax that the Exchequer collects that it goes towards the running of the country for everyone. So guess who would end up contributing a large amount of tax towards the cost of pedestrianising city centres and improving public transport so that some can have the lifestyle they want in a city but others might not benefit from? I'm quite happy to keep my car out of the city centre if those who want improved public transport and pedestrianised streets pay for it themselves and I don't have to. In the real world tax doesn't get granulated like that.

phog

Insect Overlord wrote: »

So the solution is to move everybody into towns and cities, pedestrianise the city centres, stop building roads, and invest in self-driving cars? All in the middle of a rent crisis and a housing shortage?

and do away with one way streets and only have well to do people living in the city centre.

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

phog

If urbanisation and centralisation is the solution then surely we should all move to Dublin and let the government and/or the LA invest in quality high rise high density accommodation and infrastructure.

Why waste taxpayers money in trying to force people into living in Galway, Cork, Waterford and Limerick

Vanquished

phog wrote: »

If urbanisation and centralisation is the solution then surely we should all move to Dublin and let the government and/or the LA invest in quality high rise high density accommodation and infrastructure.

Why waste taxpayers money in trying to force people into living in Galway, Cork, Waterford and Limerick

Or we could just support the growth and development of the regional cities along with rural towns and villages in order to protect their viability. The result would be sustainable concentrations of population that are the norm in the developed world. As it is. Many of our rural towns and villages are struggling badly and are hemorrhaging services because they're being hollowed out by the policy of permitting scattered development of one-off houses. Flung out in all directions, miles from these settlements.

It's infuriating and baffling at the same time to listen to TD's and rural interest groups bemoaning what they see as the lack of support for rural Ireland. The problem is that the policies that they espouse and wish to implement are exactly those that have caused so much harm in the first place! Loosening controls on dispersed one-off housing will not save rural Ireland. Promoting the growth of local towns and villages is the only way we can make them more attractive for investment.

phog

Vanquished wrote: »

Or we could just support the growth and development of the regional cities along with rural towns and villages in order to protect their viability. The result would be sustainable concentrations of population that are the norm in the developed world. As it is. Many of our rural towns and villages are struggling badly and are hemorrhaging services because they're being hollowed out by the policy of permitting scattered development of one-off houses. Flung out in all directions, miles from these settlements.

It's infuriating and baffling at the same time to listen to TD's and rural interest groups bemoaning what they see as the lack of support for rural Ireland. The problem is that the policies that they espouse and wish to implement are exactly those that have caused so much harm in the first place! Loosening controls on dispersed one-off housing will not save rural Ireland. Promoting the growth of local towns and villages is the only way we can make them more attractive for investment.

How do you reckon the building of this road doesn't support the growth & development of regional towns/villages?

zulutango

jacksie66 wrote:

Well us lot here in O Briens Bridge will gladly welcome this road if it stops the huge volume of trucks trying to navigate the bridge. It's destroyed because of them..

Maybe we can find a solution that doesn't cost 140 million euro and which won't do all the damage the LNDR will do?

zulutango

phog wrote:

and do away with one way streets and only have well to do people living in the city centre.

What are you talking about? The city should be for everybody regardless of their income. It's utterly outrageous to suggest that it should not be for those who are less well off than you.

pigtown

phog wrote: »

The road is not just for the city though.

People live and want to live outside the city and their needs are as important as those that want city life.

Absolutely their needs are important but that shouldn't prevent the council from trying to direct growth and development in an efficient manner. As it stands, Ireland's dispersed development pattern results in;
more septic tanks, inevitably leading to water pollution,
more paved roads, too expensive to maintain adequately,
very expensive/uneconomical broadband provision,
fewer rural shops, as everyone drives to their job and stops at the supermarket instead of their local shop

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Sounds a bit dystopian Communist, to be honest. It's only a few steps away from saying we should all be living in high rise buildings in minimalist cells/small apartments, without our own choice of transport or property, and the countryside kept exclusively for agriculture.

Well that's just ridiculous

marno21 wrote: »

There is currently a lack of road infrastructure in the north eastern quadrant of Limerick city considering it's home to a major university and several large employers. Its only decent road is the Dublin Road, a single carraigeway with plenty of roundabouts and busy junctions, and it has one connection to the motorway network.

It needs something more than this. This isn't a road to enable car based commuting/extra car use, it's to cater for existing needs.

I actually wouldn't have much of a problem if it was just to cater for existing needs but it's also intended to facilitate growth aswell, in my opinion in an unsustainable way.

phog wrote: »

How do you reckon the building of this road doesn't support the growth & development of regional towns/villages?

This road alone won't support the growth and development of regional towns, it would have to be coupled with very strict planning laws directing all new development into these towns, not on the outskirts or as one-off development.

phog

zulutango wrote: »

What are you talking about? The city should be for everybody regardless of their income. It's utterly outrageous to suggest that it should not be for those who are less well off than you.

This or at least the bit about Lwr Mallow St

Vanquished

phog wrote: »

How do you reckon the building of this road doesn't support the growth & development of regional towns/villages?

I'm dubious about the rationale behind the project. The contentious second phase runs through what is primarily open countryside in South East Clare. I fear the same mistakes will just be repeated once again. Poorly planned, poorly serviced, low density development facilitated by a lovely shiny new road with plenty of roundabouts to open up access to greenfield sites.

Clare County Council are probably rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of hoovering up piles of development levies while Limerick city is left to deal with the resulting congestion that will inevitably follow more uncoordinated development. History simply repeats itself. We just don't learn from our past mistakes in this country!

Vanquished

phog wrote: »

This or at least the bit about Lwr Mallow St

I live very close to Lower Mallow Street and can confirm that there are some unsavoury characters in accommodation there.

zulutango

phog wrote:

or at least the bit about Lwr Mallow St

Not sure what your point is. Are you inferring that because I pointed out how low property prices there have led to landlords doing deals with the HSE who have in turn put tough characters in the area that that somehow equates to me wanting the city for more well off people? That's a huge leap if so. I fundamentally believe the city should be for all people regardless of income so please don't infer otherwise.

Berty

In General

Jesus Wept

phog

zulutango wrote: »

Not sure what your point is. Are you inferring that because I pointed out how low property prices there have led to landlords doing deals with the HSE who have in turn put tough characters in the area that that somehow equates to me wanting the city for more well off people? That's a huge leap if so. I fundamentally believe the city should be for all people regardless of income so please don't infer otherwise.

Where do you want these people to live? Why should taxpayers aid private landlords in increases in their rents? If they want to increase their income then they should invest in their own properties.

zulutango

phog wrote: »

Where do you want these people to live? Why should taxpayers aid private landlords in increases in their rents? If they want to increase their income then they should invest in their own properties.

You've lost me there. Taxpayers are currently aiding private landlords through HSE contracts. You obviously think it's not a good idea?

kilburn

I have never seen such rubbish written in a thread as this has descended into.

At the end of the day Corbally is an absolute nightmare with traffic at peak times and this road is badly needed.

For all the objectors to the road I wonder how many have to deal with the traffic problems on a daily basis.

zulutango

kilburn wrote: »

At the end of the day Corbally is an absolute nightmare with traffic at peak times and this road is badly needed.

Two questions ..

Can you tell us why Corbally is an absolute nightmare with traffic at peak times?

Do you think there are other possible solutions to the problem?

johnmolloy554

zulutango wrote: »

Two questions ..

Can you tell us why Corbally is an absolute nightmare with traffic at peak times?

Do you think there are other possible solutions to the problem?

A query for you first, if you don't mind. Can you tell us all why Corbally is an traffic nightmare and the solutions you would propose?

kilburn

Schools, Creches, people commuting in from Clare, lack of options for people going to Work lots of people in the area are commuting to Shannon so it's the only way to travel.

Solutions - Northern Distributor Road, filter lanes could be introduced locally to help but the fact remains that won't fix the traffic issues

zulutango

johnmolloy554 wrote: »

A query for you first, if you don't mind. Can you tell us all why Corbally is an traffic nightmare and the solutions you would propose?

Yes, it's bad because a large residential area was built in an area with poor infrastructure, and in a place where it is difficult and costly to provide good infrastructure. It's simply very bad spatial planning. Much of this was the fault of Clare County Council. They should not have permitted the construction of Westbury, etc. This traffic problem is a legacy issue of the Limerick Metropolitan Area effectively having three local authorities managing it.

Solutions should be researched carefully. It's far too simplistic to say build another road to alleviate the traffic congestion. We know that more roads begets more cars which begets more roads. The local authority should commission experts to look at the problem and find good solutions instead of blindly assuming that the LNDR is the answer. More than likely the experts would recommend a range of measures that would involve public transport, walking and cycling infrastructure, some junction changes, construction of some roads that would be effective and far less costly and damaging than the LNDR.