New Business openings and closures around you?

Gareth Keenan

Gareth Keenan wrote: »

rumour was confirmed to me verbally today, they are starting to fit upstairs out for a restaurant in January.

Further Glasthule Breaking News: Le Petit Couchon (sp?)/Tribes was getting a coat of paint and is planned to reopen in January, leaving the former Peggy's Bakery as the only vacant commercial premises in Glasthule [Marine house looks like it is going residential]..

the new bakery in the Peggy's premises is opening Monday week, according to the nice man working in there this morning

Across the road from there, it looks like Cafe Du Journal have got permission to convert half of the vacant offices into a cafe with outdoor seating to the front

Fratton Fred

Gareth Keenan wrote: »

the new bakery in the Peggy's premises is opening Monday week, according to the nice man working in there this morning

Across the road from there, it looks like Cafe Du Journal have got permission to convert half of the vacant offices into a cafe with outdoor seating to the front

Is that the guys that are in Monkstown?

A cafe in that building is a genius idea, nice seating area in the front. I've always thought glasthule would be a really really great village if it could be pedestrianised.

marty_crane

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I've always thought glasthule would be a really really great village if it could be pedestrianised.

Can't believe that notion never occurred to me before. Agree with you 100% on that

Larbre34

The businesses would go apoplectic if you even suggested it. Easy car access and the cowshed carpark is the life blood of Glasthule. Next door, Dun Laoghaire stands as condemnatory example of failing to balance pedestrian and traffic demand.

Chinasea

Larbre34 wrote: »

The businesses would go apoplectic if you even suggested it. Easy car access and the cowshed carpark is the life blood of Glasthule. Next door, Dun Laoghaire stands as condemnatory example of failing to balance pedestrian and traffic demand.

It only failed because its citizens can't see beyond their steering wheels. Dun Laoghaire would be a wonderful little little town if it lost the drive thru. Car is not king.

Aard

Often the goals of pedestrianisation (pleasant environment, more footpath space, room for outdoor cafe seating, safer street) can be achieved in ways other than full-blown pedestrianisation.

stehyl15

Ah come off it why would a village like glashule be pedestrinised its not really a shooping area with loads of shops

Awaaf

If done properly i.e. not to increase traffic speeds, a one way system between Sandycove and the Blackrock bypass would work well in my opinion. Say via the coast for southbound and via DL main street for northbound. Lots of extra space given over the pedestrians, bikes etc. You could pedestrianise Glasthule and DL (with northbound routed via Tivoli Road) in such a scheme if you wanted but not sure if it would be the right thing to do. Wouldn't really change vehicular access to Glasthule and DL if you did it.

patrickbrophy18

Awaaf wrote: »

If done properly i.e. not to increase traffic speeds, a one way system between Sandycove and the Blackrock bypass would work well in my opinion. Say via the coast for southbound and via DL main street for northbound. Lots of extra space given over the pedestrians, bikes etc. You could pedestrianise Glasthule and DL (with northbound routed via Tivoli Road) in such a scheme if you wanted but not sure if it would be the right thing to do. Wouldn't really change vehicular access to Glasthule and DL if you did it.

I've suggested something like this over the past few years on similar threads but I faced a lot of criticism over it. It is clear to me that the traffic situation along the coast between Blackrock and Sandycove and as far as Dalkey is pretty dire. However, given that the bulk of it is architecturally sensitive, road widening of even modest proportions would be completely out of the question. So, a mass one-way system would be the solution. As a result, much of the surplus space left over could be used for cycle tracks.

For Dun Laoghaire Town, you could have a one-way system as follows:

• Northbound: George's Street Upper->*Marine Road->*Crofton Road
• Southbound: *Harbour Road->*Queen's Road->Park Road
• *: Where Marine Road, Crofton Road, Harbour Road and Queen's Road meet, there would be merging/transition lanes.
• Pedestrianized Section: George's Street Lower between the top of Marine Road and Bloomfields Shopping Center would be completely pedestrianized. A glass-roof would be constructed between the fascia of shops to make the pedestrianized experience feel more like the concourse of a shopping center.
  
  The only trips permitted would be the few delivery trucks and emergency vehicles (Ambulance, Garda and Fire Brigade). Between Bloomfields Shopping Center and York Road would be a minor two-way road. The purpose of this would be to feed traffic into Bloomfields Shopping Center car park. Traffic from the south-east would have to use Mulgrave and Patrick's Street's for access.
• Major Two-Way Flow: From York Road down to where it meets Crofton and Harbour Roads would be two way for the 46A, 75 and 63 routes.
• The honeycomb of existing one-way streets would stay as is.

tnethacker

stehyl15 wrote: »

McGuirks are rummoured to be opening in Leopardstown golf club madness considering they have a branch on the other side of the racecourse

But there is no connection from the golf club to the racecourse, so that's that.

the groutch

patrick, there's a few faults with your plan

having George's St. Lower available to delivery vehicles somewhat defeats the purpose of pedestrianisation, as people will still have to be on the lookout.

there will be major uproar over diverting the 7, 45a & 59 away from George's Street Upper.

by running buses along Queen's Road you'd be effectively undoing all the value of the development done down there, and at the far end where there's onstreet parking, it would be very tight for buses getting through.

you'd have to flip the one way direction of Park Road, which would mean that with Islington Avenue being one way away from the coast, the next access to the coast is way down by Cavistons.

patrickbrophy18

the groutch wrote: »

having George's St. Lower available to delivery vehicles somewhat defeats the purpose of pedestrianisation, as people will still have to be on the lookout.

It would only be at certain times of the day. Failing that, there are a good few other roads that could facilitate deliveries.

the groutch wrote: »

there will be major uproar over diverting the 7, 45a & 59 away from George's Street Upper.

I'm aware of this. However, the bus stops for the southbound trip isn't one that many people couldn't do on foot. For those who can't, the council would need to become a little more creative. Conveyor belts (like those in Airports) or horizontal lifts could carry people to the southbound stops. There are side streets that could permit this with a huge amount of space to spare for cars, bikes and the like. It's all about efficiency.

the groutch wrote: »

by running buses along Queen's Road you'd be effectively undoing all the value of the development done down there, and at the far end where there's onstreet parking, it would be very tight for buses getting through.

How exactly would bus running along Queen's Road undo the value of development done?

The development was carried out over the railway line which is adjacent to Queens Road. So, they would be operating alongside one another.

I've seen buses make trips along the stretch where there is on street parking with plenty of space for oncoming cars.

the groutch wrote: »

you'd have to flip the one way direction of Park Road, which would mean that with Islington Avenue being one way away from the coast, the next access to the coast is way down by Cavistons.

That's not true. The very nearby Mellifont Avenue adjacent to the Carpet Showrooms (LaFayettes 77) could be made one way and then used to carry traffic to the coast thereby, taking up the role which Park Road currently has.

mano bano

The 3 Phone shop is moving to the 02 shop so their will an other empty shop on George's st. With the 3 phone shop, euro shop and Corrs all gone in the last three weeks.

ted1

Still hope for shankill shopping centre: http://www.irishtimes.com/business/retail-and-services/numavicius-pauses-work-on-former-superquinn-site-in-shankill-1.2128011

Chinasea

Was in the People's Park Dun Laoghaire yesterday on such a lovely day, needed to bring one of the children to the "new" toilets. What an absolute disgrace. They have clearly not been cleaned since they were put in. The flushes weren't working properly and the two toilets we attempted to use were blocked up.

Why bother opening public toilets if they can't be maintained beyond a pig in the parlour state. I would gladly pay .50c to use the toilets if I knew they were clean. I am sure too there is someone rostered and paid on the CoCo to clean the damn things.

Kingp35

Chinasea wrote: »

Why bother opening public toilets if they can't be maintained beyond a pig in the parlour state. I would gladly pay .50c to use the toilets if I knew they were clean. I am sure too there is someone rostered and paid on the CoCo to clean the damn things.

I suggested before that there should be a charge of 20c to use public toilets. This is common practice in mainland Europe and is used to keep the toilets clean and well stocked. It also keeps out junkies etc who would misuse the facilities. Most people seemed to think it wasn't needed though. The Peoples Park toilets are proving otherwise though.

Fratton Fred

They've put modern office type cubicles in to a public park. It was never going to work.

ted1

Fratton Fred wrote: »

They've put modern office type cubicles in to a public park. It was never going to work.

As part of the tender they should have got Fallon and Byrne to provide and mantain them.

MonkstownHoop

ted1 wrote: »

As part of the tender they should have got Fallon and Byrne to provide and mantain them.

Imagine that, €5 for a wee, €7 for a poo, saver deal €10 for both, plus €2 per 30 seconds of tap with optional 50c per squirt of soap

Chinasea

Why would or should Fallon & Byrne get involved with maintaining public toilets. I believe the stall holders pay a right weekly fee to the CoCo to trade. Simply not good enough.

helimachoptor

Chinasea wrote: »

Why would or should Fallon & Byrne get involved with maintaining public toilets. I believe the stall holders pay a right weekly fee to the CoCo to trade. Simply not good enough.

sarcasm..

Agree, they are not in best condition.

I would gladly pay to use toilets that were clean and not falling apart!

ted1

Chinasea wrote: »

Why would or should Fallon & Byrne get involved with maintaining public toilets. I believe the stall holders pay a right weekly fee to the CoCo to trade. Simply not good enough.

As part of the fee, they could have got reduced rates. Stipulatins like prividing public toilets are iften written into leases.

helimachoptor

ted1 wrote: »

As part of the fee, they could have got reduced rates. Stipulatins like prividing public toilets are iften written into leases.

Is there not a parks guy who lives in the house or is he long gone?

Chinasea

helimachoptor wrote: »

Is there not a parks guy who lives in the house or is he long gone?

I'd say, judging by the state of the toilets, the 'lights are on but nobody is at home'.

wowy

Chinasea wrote: »

Was in the People's Park Dun Laoghaire yesterday on such a lovely day, needed to bring one of the children to the "new" toilets. What an absolute disgrace. They have clearly not been cleaned since they were put in. The flushes weren't working properly and the two toilets we attempted to use were blocked up.

Why bother opening public toilets if they can't be maintained beyond a pig in the parlour state. I would gladly pay .50c to use the toilets if I knew they were clean. I am sure too there is someone rostered and paid on the CoCo to clean the damn things.

I presume you contacted the council and waited for their response before posting your negative experience here, right?

ted1

wowy wrote: »

I presume you contacted the council and waited for their response before posting your negative experience here, right?

If they didn't want a negative response they should keep on top of things better

wowy

ted1 wrote: »

If they didn't want a negative response they should keep on top of things better

I know. I was just asking Chinasea as he/she has history of giving out to posters in this thread who give negative reviews etc.

In The Conversation

A few planning permissions in the Newtownpark area:

1. The derelict building alongside fu moon is requesting permission to change usage to become a shop. The request is from the same people that are renovating the playwright and the new shop will have access from Newtownpark Ave and also from the Playwright car park.
2. The former convenience store on newtown park (next to burgundy beauty and the pharmacy) is applying for permission to be a funeral home.

Chinasea

wowy wrote: »

I know. I was just asking Chinasea as he/she has history of giving out to posters in this thread who give negative reviews etc.

Dirty toilets are unacceptable. I have of course let them know. The fact that they are in this state already is extremely disappointing, I was hoping we had moved beyond the pigs in the parlour state of affairs.

Let's see if things improve, although one email from me might just get the run around.

Chinasea

wowy wrote: »

I know. I was just asking Chinasea as he/she has history of giving out to posters in this thread who give negative reviews etc.

Dirty toilets are unacceptable. I have of course let them know. The fact that they are in this state already is extremely disappointing, I was hoping we had moved beyond the pigs in the parlour state of affairs.

Let's see if things improve, although one email from me might just get the run around.