Limerick improvement projects

bigpink

The Parnell street and station project is a complete waste of money

Jofspring

bigpink wrote: »

The Parnell street and station project is a complete waste of money

Why?

Eoinbmw

Jofspring wrote: »

Why?

It looks rank already and is just a sitdown area for junkies and whinos!

panda100

kilburn wrote: »

Saw Cllr Leddins comments on this today there was a public consultation and no submissions received

That is inaccurate. 19 submissions were made. One by an individual who claims to hold the deeds for the park.

Can't say I am too enthused by the 'improvement' works so far and I would agree that they have been largely a waste of money. Davis Street doesn't know what it wants to be. It has large pavements with bollards plonked in the middle of the pavements to stop cars parking there. They would have been much better off going with the original plans of the contra-flow cycle lane imo as it's just a mess of a street really now.

Car parking in Russell Park is also not going to make the area any more pleasant or welcoming. The mythical '10%' of car parking that will take up the park is clearly ludicrous for anyone who has seen the recent plans or passed by the diggers digging up at least 40% of the park so far.

It's such a shame the expectations for our city are so low that people are defending Limerick's Council work on this "improvement" project.

bigpink

There paved over existing car park spaces and put down slippy stonework and benches with no cover
And now want car park in the green area cross from the park
The work has done nothing for the area
If anything inside the station needed work

keane2097

I'm not sure how councils keep buying that manky, slippery grey paving for projects all over the country. It's as ugly as mortal sin, unsuitable for the climate and for the most part sticks out from the surrounding areas and architecture like a broken thumb.

kilburn

panda100 wrote:

It's such a shame the expectations for our city are so low that people are defending Limerick's Council work on this "improvement" project.

I was not defending only reported what i read in the leader.

LeoD

kilburn wrote: »

Saw Cllr Leddins comments on this today there was a public consultation and no submissions received

His answer must have been taken out of context because numerous submissions were received as said by panda. Most of the submissions came from local traders who seem to be against the idea of curtailing illegal parking (ie: double parking) on Parnell St as this type of parking was the life blood of the street. An Taisce made a submission but it didn't have any impact on the final decision. Limerick traders complain about the low levels of footfall so more streets designed primarily for motor traffic and more onstreet car parking can only be welcomed. Shur how else could you increase footfall?

panda100

LeoD wrote: »

His answer must have been taken out of context because numerous submissions were received

Either way he and the rest of the sitting councillors approved this development. I am all for the improvement of our city but this project is a disaster. It's classic project splitting and original plans have changed so much from what has been implemented that the initial consultation accounts for nothing anymore.

kilburn

Oh my god i am agreeing with a suggestion from An Taisce there must be a full moon.

Traffic would be bad at peak times which would congest some routes even more though.

Cookiemunster

bigpink wrote: »

There paved over existing car park spaces and put down slippy stonework and benches with no cover
And now want car park in the green area cross from the park
The work has done nothing for the area
If anything inside the station needed work

Who are they? I said this multiple times before, but here goes again.

The plaza and any possible station upgrades = CIE.

Parnell St, Davis St. and the current works = LCCC.

Neither project has anything to do with the other, other than occurring around the same time and complimenting each other.

LeoD

panda100 wrote: »

Either way he and the rest of the sitting councillors approved this development. I am all for the improvement of our city but this project is a disaster. It's classic project splitting and original plans have changed so much from what has been implemented that the initial consultation accounts for nothing anymore.

Couldn't agree more. But look, if people are happy with how the city has been developed over the past few decades and want more of the same then here they have it.

Cookiemunster

LeoD wrote: »

Couldn't agree more. But look, if people are happy with how the city has been developed over the past few decades and want more of the same then here they have it.

People disagreeing with your (or other posters) point of view does not equate to being happy with the development of the city.

Frankly I'm sick of that type of accusation being thrown about. The world people is not black or white, but many, many shades of grey with room for disagreement on the same side of the argument.

phog

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Who are they? I said this multiple times before, but here goes again.

The plaza and any possible station upgrades = CIE.

Parnell St, Davis St. and the current works = LCCC.

Neither project has anything to do with the other, other than occurring around the same time and complimenting each other.

I think people are confused because they happen to be close to each other and happening around the same time but they really should know that the front of the station was done by CIE.

phog

LeoD wrote: »

His answer must have been taken out of context because numerous submissions were received as said by panda. Most of the submissions came from local traders who seem to be against the idea of curtailing illegal parking (ie: double parking) on Parnell St as this type of parking was the life blood of the street. An Taisce made a submission but it didn't have any impact on the final decision. Limerick traders complain about the low levels of footfall so more streets designed primarily for motor traffic and more onstreet car parking can only be welcomed. Shur how else could you increase footfall?

If I'm reading the An Taisce proposal correctly then it actually cuts the green area completely off from the new houses - having two way traffic on the existing Hyde Road would make it an absolute nightmare for pedestrians and drivers.

LeoD

phog wrote: »

If I'm reading the An Taisce proposal correctly then it actually cuts the green area completely off from the new houses - having two way traffic on the existing Hyde Road would make it an absolute nightmare for pedestrians and drivers.

I'm not really interested in discussing the merits of their proposal - just wanted to show that submissions were made and at least one was opposed to the new parking.

mdmix

well, this isn't a good sign! as I understand it tho, final decision is with an Bord Pleanála

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/business/dunnes-stores-halt-bid-to-declare-closed-limerick-shopping-centre-a-vacant-site-899324.html

Reputable Rog

mdmix wrote: »

well, this isn't a good sign! as I understand it tho, final decision is with an Bord Pleanála

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/business/dunnes-stores-halt-bid-to-declare-closed-limerick-shopping-centre-a-vacant-site-899324.html

It seems the Council handled this in a very sloppy manner. Offering to buy the site then slapping it on the register when Dunnes refused to sell.
Saying that I've no sympathy for Dunnes, I think they are behaving in an appalling manner leaving unnecessary vacancy in retail centres.

kilburn

No surprise the council are incompetent in so many things they do

bigpink

Fair enough I take your point it’s two different projects LCCC and CIE but surely they had a joint plan
Still think Parnell street a shocking waste of money

mdmix

Reputable Rog wrote: »

It seems the Council handled this in a very sloppy manner. Offering to buy the site then slapping it on the register when Dunnes refused to sell.
Saying that I've no sympathy for Dunnes, I think they are behaving in an appalling manner leaving unnecessary vacancy in retail centres.

Fully agree with you on this, but from a legal standpoint this is a disaster. There are 2 seperate sets of public plans which show the councils plans to acquire the building. Having said that, the site is clearly long term vacant and the constant stream of leaking water from it would suggest its derilict. An Bord Pleanála have upheld DCC move of a Dunnes to the derilict sites register so if the same isint done for limerick then it is simply down to incompetence on the part of limerick council.

PetKing

If Sarsfield Street is not being added to the derelict list of sites, then surely they are doing just enough, stream of water or no, to keep it from being legally termed as derelict. It's rock and a hard place territory now... LCC showed their cards with their interest to acquire the site, and the court knows that. Where do you go from here??

keane2097

What's the difference in trying to by a place before declaring it vacant/derelict, versus declaring it vacant/derelict and then trying to buy it?

The council are surely snookered if wanting to buy a place means their declarations on its status are taken as bad faith.

In my eyes trying to buy the place up front, before you start the process of changing its status is the more honourable approach. Just because they want to buy it doesn't make it occupied or in good order.

James Bond Junior

There are suggestions on social media for the people of Limerick to boycott other Dunnes stores around the city until something is done. Not a bad idea if it came to pass.

damowill

James Bond Junior wrote: »

There are suggestions on social media for the people of Limerick to boycott other Dunnes stores around the city until something is done. Not a bad idea if it came to pass.

i rarely shop at Dunnes, so for me it will be easy.

I believe Dunnes have 4 locations in Limerick, City Centre, Ennis Road, Childers Rd and Parkway.

Here is alternative shopping for those who wish to boycott Dunne Stores

City Centre Alternatives: Tesco Arthurs Quay
Ennis Road Alternatives: Lidl Ennis Rd & Tesco (Coonagh)
Childers Road and Parkway Alternatives: Tesco Roxboro, Aldi Roxboro, Lidl Dublin Road

James Bond Junior

Mods, would a thread asking to boycott dunnes for the above reasons be a runner?

Cookiemunster

James Bond Junior wrote: »

There are suggestions on social media for the people of Limerick to boycott other Dunnes stores around the city until something is done. Not a bad idea if it came to pass.

Yeah, put the jobs of hundreds of Limerick workers and thousands of suppliers at risk. Great idea.

PetKing

keane2097 wrote:

What's the difference in trying to by a place before declaring it vacant/derelict, versus declaring it vacant/derelict and then trying to buy it?

keane2097 wrote:

The council are surely snookered if wanting to buy a place means their declarations on its status are taken as bad faith.

The court already knew in considering it's vacant status that LCC wanted the property for themselves as they had previously placed an offer, and we're only pursuing this course of action to try and force Dunnes into reconsidering it's ownership, and perhaps selling. They want the site, not the 3% vacancy levy.

damowill

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Yeah, put the jobs of hundreds of Limerick workers and thousands of suppliers at risk. Great idea.

we'd be doing them a favour :P

source

keane2097 wrote: »

What's the difference in trying to by a place before declaring it vacant/derelict, versus declaring it vacant/derelict and then trying to buy it?

The council are surely snookered if wanting to buy a place means their declarations on its status are taken as bad faith.

In my eyes trying to buy the place up front, before you start the process of changing its status is the more honourable approach. Just because they want to buy it doesn't make it occupied or in good order.

From my reading of the irish times link, it looks like Dunnes are claiming that the vacant site levy was vindictivly applied for as they wouldn't sell to the council, which would be a misuse of the levy.