Pedestrianising O'Connell Street

Straight Talker

Silentcorner wrote: »

What Limerick city centre suffers from is the classic dough nut effect, it has effected Limerick more than any other city centre in this country...which has had an impact on the appearance of the city centre...I don't think you'll find anyone in this city who isn't aware of the issues facing the city centre...a greater garda presence would only be for optics...there isn't a city centre crime issue...its not like we are all getting mugged all the time or having our phones robbed...

It is not because it is an unattractive place to do business or because or "the dregs of society anti social youths and drug users"...which is what you suggested...you posted in this thread to question the point of making any improvements to O'Connell St...that is your opinion.

An improvement in the streetscape is of huge importance, look at the impact the same improvement had in Cork!

There are many factors for Limericks footfall issues.The bit in bold is not the only reason for a lack of footfall in the city centre but it is still one of the reasons nonetheless in my opinion along with the doughnut affect.

Silentcorner

Straight Talker wrote: »

There are many factors for Limericks footfall issues.The bit in bold is not the only reason for a lack of footfall in the city centre but it is still one of the reasons nonetheless in my opinion along with the doughnut affect.

Ya you have made your opinion quiet clear...mission accomplished!

dominatinMC

There was a lot of consternation on twitter last night about this topic. The council launched a new proposal which, from what I could tell, widens the pavements, but still maintains two lanes of traffic. The general consensus seemed to be that this was a safe, boring, unadventurous approach. Forgive my ignorance on this topic, but I assume that this is not the final proposal, and when is a final decision going to made?

Cookiemunster

dominatinMC wrote: »

There was a lot of consternation on twitter last night about this topic. The council launched a new proposal which, from what I could tell, widens the pavements, but still maintains two lanes of traffic. The general consensus seemed to be that this was a safe, boring, unadventurous approach. Forgive my ignorance on this topic, but I assume that this is not the final proposal, and when is a final decision going to made?

https://www.limerick.ie/council/newsroom/news/oconnell-street-everyone-emerging-plan-re-imagining-street-unveiled

Seems it's a single lane of traffic between William St and Roches St, with a bus lane added to that between Roches St. and Mallow St.

This is the important bit for your question:

Feedback on this emerging plan will now be accepted until 29th of June 2017.

Submissions will be accepted by post and email to:

David Healy, Limerick City and County Council, Merchant’s Quay, Limerick, V94 EH90
Tel: 061-407100/ 061-407129
Email: LUCROC@arup.com
Website: https://smartertravel.limerick.ie/project/remodelling-oconnell-street

Following this period of consultation, the Part 8 planning application will be published and the finalised plans will be put on public display for a six-week period. Members of the public and other stakeholders will have a further two weeks at the end of that period to make submissions

Townie_P

From what I have seen of it, it's a boring, bog standard unimaginative solution that yes will change the city centre, but it won't be anything special. It's basically a copy of Patrick Street in Cork. Wider footpaths and a some shrubs/trees. Very disappointing to be honest. This is a huge opportunity to create a city centre space that is unique, modern and a trademark for the city. It's being wasted by the buffoons in the council. I hope all the Livable Limerick promoters will lambast this over the coming weeks.

Also, is it just me or is the smartertravel.limerick.ie website down? Can't access it at all.

Jofspring

On the radio Tuesday morning they were saying to get down to the city council offices if you want your say on the plans. Once it moves to the next stage that is it and it's done and dusted.

They seem to have given people plenty of opportunity to have a say in it and if nobody steps forward with opinions or good alternatives then we can't have too many complaints with what we end up with can we?

sleepyman

Jofspring wrote: »

On the radio Tuesday morning they were saying to get down to the city council offices if you want your say on the plans. Once it moves to the next stage that is it and it's done and dusted.

They seem to have given people plenty of opportunity to have a say in it and if nobody steps forward with opinions or good alternatives then we can't have too many complaints with what we end up with can we?

Did I read it will be another year before the work starts?It's only taken 16 years since this was first proposed!!

Cookiemunster

sleepyman wrote: »

Did I read it will be another year before the work starts?It's only taken 16 years since this was first proposed!!

It has funding, but will have to go through planning and then a contractor will have to be tendered. Irish bureaucracy won't allow it to go any faster.

keane2097

Jofspring wrote: »

On the radio Tuesday morning they were saying to get down to the city council offices if you want your say on the plans. Once it moves to the next stage that is it and it's done and dusted.

They seem to have given people plenty of opportunity to have a say in it and if nobody steps forward with opinions or good alternatives then we can't have too many complaints with what we end up with can we?

Loads of people have made submissions and given feedback on the disappointing plans put out by the council already.

The idea that the council need to be told what to do by a load of random lay people and couldn't figure out that having two lanes of traffic in front of Pennys is a disaster themselves kind of boils my piss.

Vanquished

I was talking to one of the consultants at the consultation and he said that they were looking to be on site by November.

dominatinMC

Lots of people seem to have various issues with the proposal. Hopefully they are making their voices heard because, to be fair, the council seem to be giving them a decent opportunity to express these opinions. However, what worries me is the lingering suspicion that the council has already settled on this design/plan...are these public forums/feedback opportunites just a token gesture by the council? I'm not really aware how these processes work, but hopefully the council will actually listen and, more importantly, respond to the public feedback.

zulutango

According to one of the consultants I spoke to they were asked not to model full pedestrianisation.

Vanquished

zulutango wrote: »

According to one of the consultants I spoke to they were asked not to model full pedestrianisation.

I was speaking with one of the council officials and he became immediately defensive when I commented on the lack of a pedestrianised zone. When I pressed him further on re-routing traffic and changing the one way system on Henry Street for instance he just dismissed the suggestion as being outside the scope of the plan. Which is complete bull when you consider it would cost very little in the overall scheme of things. His attitude just personified the sheer lack of will, courage and ambition within the council!

bonnieprince

dominatinMC wrote: »

Lots of people seem to have various issues with the proposal. Hopefully they are making their voices heard because, to be fair, the council seem to be giving them a decent opportunity to express these opinions. However, what worries me is the lingering suspicion that the council has already settled on this design/plan...are these public forums/feedback opportunites just a token gesture by the council? I'm not really aware how these processes work, but hopefully the council will actually listen and, more importantly, respond to the public feedback.

The same thing happened for the Smarter Travel initiative, lots of public consultation but i don't think i saw one thing that was put forward appearing in the final plan. I would hope that the council would listen but i think the reality is that they have their plan ready to go and that this consultation is the usual token gesture.

zulutango

Anyone putting a submission in on this? Deadline is this Thursday.

johnnyryan89

zulutango wrote: »

Anyone putting a submission in on this? Deadline is this Thursday.

Where do you enter any submissions?

zulutango

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

Where do you enter any submissions?

It doesn't specifically say, but contact details and plans are on the following links.

https://www.limerick.ie/council/services/roads-and-travel/limerick-urban-centre-revitalisation/oconnell-street-limerick

https://smartertravel.limerick.ie/project/reimagining-oconnell-street

johnnyryan89

zulutango wrote: »

It doesn't specifically say, but contact details and plans are on the following links.

https://www.limerick.ie/council/services/roads-and-travel/limerick-urban-centre-revitalisation/oconnell-street-limerick

https://smartertravel.limerick.ie/project/reimagining-oconnell-street

So you send off an email to the project manager David Healy with your opinions on their design and what you think should happen, I'd say any emails sent to him are probably sent straight to the spam folder.

The #LiveableLimerick has been going strong the last few weeks, hopefully those who have been pushing it strong have convinced those in charge to make a few bold decisions. But going by this tweet from Canteen on work that was meant to happen on Davis St I wouldn't really have much faith in them when it comes to O'Connell St https://twitter.com/wearecanteen/status/878580152959160321

zulutango

Quite possibly.

What they've come up with as the 'preferred option' is basically not a whole lot more ambitious that what was proposed about ten years ago.

And, as you see with Davis and Parnell Streets, they're not even capable of implementing their own unambitious plans.

Jofspring

Ya no trees, no cycle lanes and the two disabled parking spots have been removed from Davis Street.

That pic is also old because the street has been switched with parking on left as you go up it instead of right and the street will be a contra-flow rather than one way.

kilburn

Total joke

panda100

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

I'd say any emails sent to him are probably sent straight to the spam folder.

Yep. There really is just a huge apathy towards this project and consultation process imo. I sent in a submission that I expect to be ignored and indeed it already is. I asked a very specific question that legally requires a response from LCCC but have heard nothing from them as of yet. Not going to waste my energies following up with them as ultimately any public contributions will be dismissed.

zulutango

panda100 wrote: »

Yep. There really is just a huge apathy towards this project and consultation process imo. I sent in a submission that I expect to be ignored and indeed it already is. I asked a very specific question that legally requires a response from LCCC but have heard nothing from them as of yet. Not going to waste my energies following up with them as ultimately any public contributions will be dismissed.

That's one way to ensure you won't be listened to. Unfortunately these things require energy and constant pressure. It shouldn't be this way, but the alternative is to not engage and live with the inevitable result. For what it's worth, I think efforts can be effective as I've had a few successes over the years, even if at times I felt I was banging my head off a brick wall.

dominatinMC

panda100 wrote: »

Yep. There really is just a huge apathy towards this project and consultation process imo. I sent in a submission that I expect to be ignored and indeed it already is. I asked a very specific question that legally requires a response from LCCC but have heard nothing from them as of yet. Not going to waste my energies following up with them as ultimately any public contributions will be dismissed.

So it appears that all this talk about "engaging with the public" was just rhetoric for their PR campaign. So fustrating, especially when you consider this is public money, and this project is FOR the public.

zulutango

dominatinMC wrote: »

So it appears that all this talk about "engaging with the public" was just rhetoric for their PR campaign. So fustrating, especially when you consider this is public money, and this project is FOR the public.

It's certainly frustrating but not engaging is not the answer. For example, Limerick Cycling Campaign managed to get a contra-flow cycle lane on a few sections. This would not have happened without the pressure they put on.

In any case, there's time to make submissions yet. If we don't make them we are only ensuring we won't be listened to. If we make them, there's at least a chance.

dominatinMC

zulutango wrote: »

It's certainly frustrating but not engaging is not the answer. For example, Limerick Cycling Campaign managed to get a contra-flow cycle lane on a few sections. This would not have happened without the pressure they put on.

In any case, there's time to make submissions yet. If we don't make them we are only ensuring we won't be listened to. If we make them, there's at least a chance.

Don't get me wrong, I still plan on making a submission! It might be piss*ng against the wind, but at least I can rest assured that I made some bit of an effort

bonnieprince

zulutango wrote: »

Anyone putting a submission in on this? Deadline is this Thursday.

Thanks for reminding me, just sent in mine.
Hopefully someone is listening.

keane2097

Would any of you be willing to post up a few snippets from your submissions to give others a bit of a template to work off?

Would like to do more than just giving feedback on Twitter but wouldn't know where to start with an actual submission.

Cookiemunster

It's not just people on here who are unsatisfied with the current proposals.

https://twitter.com/moranjohna1/status/880061671124893697

pigtown

Below is the bulk of my submission which I sent to the ARUP email address and to the metropolitan area Councillors.;

The Crescent
I like the plaza but have some concerns. Will the grass be muddy in winter? Will it be cut often enough? Does the proposed water feature occupy too much space in what is an already small area? Will the O'Connell monument be re-orientated to face the new plaza?

Lower Hartstonge St. to Roches St.
I have concerns about the bus lane and the contra-flow cycle lane.

The bus lane issue is more a question of if it's needed. Assuming bus routes don't change, buses will be stuck in traffic along the single lane William St.-Roches St. section, and then gain speed along the rest of the street. Or a single shared lane is enough for both buses and cars and so the rest of the bus lane isn't needed. I understand you need to balance competing modes of transport but I don't think this is a satisfactory compromise for the city.

In relation to the cycle lane, the junction layouts seem to require cyclist to use the pedestrian crossings. I assume this isn't the case? And I wonder where cyclists are expected to go when they reach Roches St.? The cycle lane ends but the single traffic lane is going in the wrong direction, cyclists weaving along the footpaths will lead to collisions and injuries.

Would it be possible to increase the pedestrian space outside the Belltable? This would be a nice place for small gatherings and audience spillout.

The shared-surface area outside the Rugby Museum seems like it could be redundant. Neither the museum nor the bank across the street will attract people to linger outside them. This type of space might be better located outside of restaurants/retail. I understand that you have to plan long term and can't be overly influenced by what type of business occupies a unit at the moment but it's highly unlikely either the museum or the bank will be relocating in the medium term.

Roches St. to Denmark St.
Again, the cycle and bus lane issues.
I'd prefer if the Roches St.-William St. section could be totally pedestrianised but if this isn't possible could a similar model to Cork's Oliver Plunkett St. but implemented? Namely closing the street to cars between 10 and 5?

I don't think the arrangement for the Thomas Street junction is satisfactory. It's not clear which side car traffic should go on or if it's a roundabout. It's inevitable that cars will stop here and use the small bit of extra space as short term 'flashing-hazard-light' parking. The glass barriers appear to block pedestrians from accessing this area. Why? And will these barriers be cleaned daily? Dirty glass is never pleasing.
Again, is grass a suitable material for what will hopefully be a heavily trafficked street?

Would it be possible to install a diagonal pedestrian crossing at the William St. junction? Crossing from Debenham's to Brown Thomas could be made easier.
Removing parking on Liddy St. would allow for a two way street here, providing a more straight-forward route from Arthur's Quay to Shannon St, and also enabling you to remove a lane of traffic between Denmark St. and William St. This would effectively allow for 75% of the street space from Denmark St. to Roches St. to be pedestrianised. It would also create space for a continuation of the proposed contra-flow cycle lane the length of the street.