Limerick improvement projects

johnmolloy554

Brennans Row wrote: »

Something must happen here but like the half hearted threats made by the council against the owners of the Dunnes Stores Shopping Centre at Sarsfield’s Bridge, I don’t see any improvement on this site for years to come.

You're quite wrong on this point. Parkway Valley is a derelict site but Dunnes Stores Sarsfield St is not a derelict property. It's closed up. It's ugly. It's an eyesore but it's not derelict.

mdmix

johnmolloy554 wrote: »

You're quite wrong on this point. Parkway Valley is a derelict site but Dunnes Stores Sarsfield St is not a derelict property. It's closed up. It's ugly. It's an eyesore but it's not derelict.

Dunnes has had no use in over 10 years. it is neglected and therefore derelict. there is constantly water leaking from the entrance.

the half finished 4 story building down next to Mollys student bar, near the milk market, has been on the derelict sites register since 2009. no action here either.

Cookiemunster

mdmix wrote: »

Dunnes has had no use in over 10 years. it is neglected and therefore derelict. there is constantly water leaking from the entrance.

the half finished 4 story building down next to Mollys student bar, near the milk market, has been on the derelict sites register since 2009. no action here either.

Dunnes has been used quite a few times by the Santa experience. It wasn't there last year, but definitely the number of years before that, so the building hasn't been unused for 10 years.

zulutango

The old Dunnes on Sarsfield Street is more a vacant site than a derelict one. Not sure it is strictly that under the new legislation though.

Strettie11

Definition of derelict site under Irish Statute
In this section “derelict site” means any land (in this section referred to as “the land in question”) which detracts, or is likely to detract, to a material degree from the amenity, character or appearance of land in the neighbourhood of the land in question because of—

(a) the existence on the land in question of structures which are in a ruinous, derelict or dangerous condition, or

(b) the neglected, unsightly or objectionable condition of the land or any structures on the land in question, or

(c) the presence, deposit or collection on the land in question of any litter, rubbish, debris or waste, except where the presence, deposit or collection of such litter, rubbish, debris or waste results from the exercise of a right conferred by statute or by common law.


Definition of vacant site for vacant site register
In this Part, a site is a vacant site if—

(a) in the case of a site consisting of residential land—

(i) the site is situated in an area in which there is a need for housing,

(ii) the site is suitable for the provision of housing, and

(iii) the site, or the majority of the site, is vacant or idle,

and

(b) in the case of a site consisting of regeneration land—

(i) the site, or the majority of the site, is vacant or idle, and

(ii) the site being vacant or idle has adverse effects on existing amenities or reduces the amenity provided by existing public infrastructure and facilities (within the meaning of section 48 of the Act of 2000) in the area in which the site is situated or has adverse affects on the character of the area.

(2) In this section—

“site” means any area of land exceeding 0.05 hectares identified by a planning authority in its functional area but does not include any structure that is a person’s home;

“home”, in relation to a person, means a dwelling in which the person ordinarily resides (notwithstanding any periods during which the dwelling is vacant) and includes any garden or portion of ground attached to and usually occupied with the dwelling or otherwise required for the amenity or convenience of the dwelling.

This is LImerick's Vacant site register No you are seeing correctly not one site on it. In fact every council in Munster has blank vacant site register except , hats off, to Waterford who have some good work done

Zulutango is correct Dunnes site amazingingly not a vacant site

zulutango

Strettie11 wrote: »

Zulutango is correct Dunnes site amazingingly not a vacant site

I think the current government watered down the legislation to make it all but useless. The last thing they wanted was supporters .. I mean owners of vacant sites being charged a levy for doing nothing with them for years.

Brennans Row

johnmolloy554 wrote: »

You're quite wrong on this point. Parkway Valley is a derelict site but Dunnes Stores Sarsfield St is not a derelict property. It's closed up. It's ugly. It's an eyesore but it's not derelict.

I was referring to the spat that the council had with the owners of idle buildings on Liddy Street some ten years or so ago.

For all of the council’s pressure, nothing to date has changed.

A better comparison would be Madden’s building shell at the Milk Market.

mart 23

Savoy project has got conditional approval from the Council

Vanquished

mart 23 wrote: »

Savoy project has got conditional approval from the Council

That's very surprising. 14 conditions attached. We don't know the nature yet. Even the most simplistic applications often get slapped with a further information request. I'm astonished that this didn't, considering the scale and impact!

It's a certainty to be appealed to ABP.

Reputable Rog

Vanquished wrote: »

That's very surprising. 14 conditions attached. We don't know the nature yet. Even the most simplistic applications often get slapped with a further information request. I'm astonished that this didn't, considering the scale and impact!

It's a certainty to be appealed to ABP.

Were any objections received?

mart 23

Reputable Rog wrote: »

Were any objections received?

There was one from a woman called Cait. An An Taisce person I think.

dashoonage

mart 23 wrote: »

There was one from a woman called Cait An An Taisce person I think.

Will you go away! An Tasice never object to planning!

Reputable Rog

mart 23 wrote: »

There was one from a woman called Cait. An An Taisce person I think.

Definitely going to be appealed so. The original Opera Centre may have actually have been built and open if she hadn't constantly objected and appealed.
I say may, the original developer seems bit of a Lyle Lanley so it's hard to know in reality.

manna452121

Reputable Rog wrote: »

Were any objections received?

This from An Taisce http://eplan.limerick.ie/iDocsWebDPSS/ViewFiles.aspx?docid=1149093&format=jpeg

pigtown

Reputable Rog wrote: »

Definitely going to be appealed so. The original Opera Centre may have actually have been built and open if she hadn't constantly objected and appealed.
I say may, the original developer seems bit of a Lyle Lanley so it's hard to know in reality.

Thank god for that. The original Opera Centre would have been an absolute disaster for the city

zulutango

We should be erecting a statue to her for this alone. That original plan was a disaster. It is amazing that in a city of 100,000 people it falls to just a few to stand in the way of such short sighted and damaging projects. The reason we have such an under-performing city is because we let this kind of damaging development happen and don't demand higher standards for our city. Most people just grumble after the damage is done.

Vanquished

The original 2005 proposal was incredibly destructive. It would've butchered the remaining original buildings on Patrick Street, Rutland Street and Ellen Street. It was massively overscaled and would have sucked the life out of the city centre proper and in to an bland, generic enclosed shopping mall.

It's difficult to locate decent images of the plans but these give an idea. Would we be happy with this standard of design?!

tototoe

And 12 years later it's such an attractive part of the city...?

Vanquished

tototoe wrote: »

And 12 years later it's such an attractive part of the city...?

Of course not. But is development at all costs better than no development?

pigtown

That 'development at all costs' attitude has left us with Cruises Street and Arthurs Quay, neither of which can be described as particularly transformative and a relatively short time later there is talk of demolishing them.

The original Opera project would have ensured a permanently dead street front along Rutland Street and some of Patrick Street. It would have drawn existing city centre retailers to the new centre leaving lots of vacancy on other streets.

MrLaurel

pigtown wrote: »

... It would have drawn existing city centre retailers to the new centre leaving lots of vacancy on other streets.

Or it would have drawn retailers from the Crescent Shopping Centre back into the City Centre and at least given City Centre retail a fighting chance.

I do agree it would have been too big though. But what the City needs is an Opera Lane type development that would allow the correct size of retail unit that is lacking.

zulutango

One of the reasons the Crescent is so successful is that the available units are a suitable size. Conversely, it's one of the reasons that the city struggles.

However, it's not the main reason by a long stretch. The Crescent's market is the wider Midwest Region rather than just Limerick City. It makes sense for retailers to base themselves in a place with good access to the Midwest. The city centre doesn't have that so many of them would be shooting themselves in the feet by moving in.

geotrig

Its 2 miles away at best !It has good access to the midwest.

If there was a centre , proper shopping centre, in the city no matter what size (bigger and better planded than arthurs key ,it would help draw retailers in and further proper development of the city, it works in other cities and no reason it wouldnt work here.
Dont get me wrong i absolutely hated that opera centre plan.

Both market themselves to the midwest region but the cresent has the upper hand for a long while now. The city need better retail units /size and we dont need to knock georgian building to do that either.

Vanquished

The Crescent had already expanded to it's current size by 2005. (Save for the current minor reconfiguration obviously). Any suggestion that the "opera centre" would have drawn retailers from the successful Crescent are a bit fanciful.

The Crescent is well established at this point. It's been trading for almost 45 years. It has been expanded, upgraded & modernised ever since to meet the needs of retailers and has reaped the benefits. We simply haven't seen the same level of continuous investment in the city centre and as a result it has stagnated. There is no silver bullet but certainly a development of dedicated retail floorspace in the general Arthur's Quay area as mooted would be a real boost. It needs to happen soon as well.

zulutango

geotrig wrote: »

Its 2 miles away at best !It has good access to the midwest.

If there was a centre , proper shopping centre, in the city no matter what size (bigger and better planded than arthurs key ,it would help draw retailers in and further proper development of the city, it works in other cities and no reason it wouldnt work here.
Dont get me wrong i absolutely hated that opera centre plan.

Both market themselves to the midwest region but the cresent has the upper hand for a long while now. The city need better retail units /size and we dont need to knock georgian building to do that either.

It's a tricky 2 miles if you're coming from West Limerick, North Cork or West Clare though. I do take your point about retail unit size, but the real upper hand that the Crescent has is that it's on the edge of the city and has first dibs on a catchment in the region of a few hundred thousand people. Bear in mind also that about 50% of the metropolitan population of Limerick lives in the suburbs also and the Crescent is handier to get to for them too. And, on top of that, that 50% largely makes up the spending demographic. In many respects the Crescent isn't the problem, it's the symptom of the problem.

jbkenn

Work has commenced with a vengeance this morning on the Coonagh to Knockalisheen Distributor Road.

Cookiemunster

jbkenn wrote: »

Work has commenced with a vengeance this morning on the Coonagh to Knockalisheen Distributor Road.

Only 300m of it unfortunately.

OfTheMarsWongs

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Only 300m of it unfortunately.

Seems to be a bit of a dip from the roundabout down to the field they’re going through.

Didn’t realise also that it would be branching off the roundabout at the Tesco exit. The one after the petrol station.

kilburn

I though it was going by the roundabout with the illegal halting site at clondrinagh although its one semi circular road

OfTheMarsWongs

kilburn wrote: »

I though it was going by the roundabout with the illegal halting site at clondrinagh although its one semi circular road

The work I saw was in the field next to the Tesco exit. The roundabout that’s past the Tesco petrol station. The caravans are at the other end of that road.