Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Cork developments

Options
18081838586300

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 24 Corkbiiy


    That sounds totally contradictory to what I was told!

    I know I'm looking forward to reading CMATS anyway.


    Thanks, btw.

    you see I could be wrong

    a lot of things are segregated, like theres 2 other plans, north docks and south docks, CMATS very minor in the large scheme of things

    there is upgrade planned for the glanmire interchange when dunkettle is finished, and maybe the stuff you're on about is in those plans


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,155 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Corkbiiy wrote: »
    you see I could be wrong

    a lot of things are segregated, like theres 2 other plans, north docks and south docks, CMATS very minor in the large scheme of things

    there is upgrade planned for the glanmire interchange when dunkettle is finished, and maybe the stuff you're on about is in those plans

    Exactly.

    What I've also been told is that sustainable transport is THE big push in CMATS. New segregated greenways to/from a number of the suburbs.
    Luas.
    More bus lanes.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24 Corkbiiy


    Exactly.

    What I've also been told is that sustainable transport is THE big push in CMATS. New segregated greenways to/from a number of the suburbs.
    Luas.
    More bus lanes.

    yes you're correct on all points there, walking/cycling are probably bigger parts of it than luas and BusConnects, but sure this would go in the one ear and out the other for us corkonians when we head the word LUAS


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,601 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    kub wrote: »
    They will be delighted to know so, in that case, that some other lads are building away mad on their site in Maryborough and have been for the last number of weeks.

    Thats the Glenveagh site on the other side of the road.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,999 ✭✭✭opus


    snotboogie wrote: »
    There is work being done on the mound of rubble on Sullivan's Quay. While it is an eyesore and possible health risk it may be bad news for the Events Centre as it was planned for use on site there.

    I was looking at this before work earlier, looked like a digger was just moving the rubble around as there weren't any trucks in there to take it away :confused:

    479892.jpg

    On a more positive note, looks like the new support for the new pedestrian bridge are ready & waiting.

    479893.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,478 ✭✭✭Curb Your Enthusiasm


    Probably too early to know but will Bus Eireann keep their contract to run new services, BRT etc when it's all in place? I imagine LRT may be given to Transdev, similar to Dublin?


  • Registered Users Posts: 24 Corkbiiy


    Probably too early to know but will Bus Eireann keep their contract to run new services, BRT etc when it's all in place? I imagine LRT may be given to Transdev, similar to Dublin?

    This is far beyond the scope of CMATS, which is only a feasibility document (not even a concept document, which would have more detail), but yes Bu Eireann will keep the buses, no idea who will run the LRT. CMATS is about a 115 odd pages, and maybe half is graphics and full page pictures, so very light on detail.


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Corkbiiy wrote: »
    let's let the report do the talking

    https:// i.imgur .com/kH3itA4.png

    That's an excellent argument for a motorway M22, M25, M27, M40 North Ring and M71 to provide regional connectivity but not be used to enhance sprawl.

    For reference, all these roads are already carrying motorway levels of traffic. Trying to strangle them will not work.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24 Corkbiiy


    marno21 wrote: »
    That's an excellent argument for a motorway M22, M25, M27, M40 North Ring and M71 to provide regional connectivity but not be used to enhance sprawl.

    For reference, all these roads are already carrying motorway levels of traffic. Trying to strangle them will not work.

    I'll let you have a read and see if the planners agree with you!

    https:// i.imgur. com/p39rfVX.png

    https:// i.imgur. com/nl9TBZx.png

    To the poster who talked about grade separation around Amgen site, looks like it's included in this picture ;)


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Corkbiiy wrote: »
    I'll let you have a read and see if the planners agree with you!

    https:// i.imgur. com/p39rfVX.png

    https:// i.imgur. com/nl9TBZx.png

    To the poster who talked about grade separation around Amgen site, looks like it's included in this picture ;)

    Thank you for that. At least we know now what the Northern Distributor Road is.

    The lack of N71 improvements is disappointing but it is kind of outside the scope of the CMATS too.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24 Corkbiiy


    marno21 wrote: »
    Thank you for that. At least we know now what the Northern Distributor Road is.

    The lack of N71 improvements is disappointing but it is kind of outside the scope of the CMATS too.

    Theres an SDR too, that one is the pipe dream which requires a viaduct

    there is absolutely no breakdown of costs in this, only final figures for each section (roads, walking/cycling, luas, busconnects)

    so I doubt we can get all of this done for 3.5bn, or even double it, 7bn, Luas is down as costing 1bn, so the planners must have been smoking some very good hashish when they wrote all this


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Corkbiiy wrote: »
    Theres an SDR too, that one is the pipe dream which requires a viaduct

    there is absolutely no breakdown of costs in this, only final figures for each section (roads, walking/cycling, luas, busconnects)

    so I doubt we can get all of this done for 3.5bn, or even double it, 7bn, Luas is down as costing 1bn, so the planners must have been smoking some very good hashish when they wrote all this
    If they are serious about developing Cork then this all has to be spent. A lot of it is proper no brainer stuff that would easily recoup the investment.

    I have little faith that the investment will be easily found. Look at the events centre mess and the road network around Cork to see that though.

    All we can hope for is that having a functional organisation (the NTA) driving this for once some of it might happen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24 Corkbiiy


    marno21 wrote: »
    If they are serious about developing Cork then this all has to be spent. A lot of it is proper no brainer stuff that would easily recoup the investment.

    I have little faith that the investment will be easily found. Look at the events centre mess and the road network around Cork to see that though.

    All we can hope for is that having a functional organisation (the NTA) driving this for once some of it might happen.

    have a look at this gem,

    the present value of the investment is only 2.3bn, total return of 5.7bn (3 odd bn profit), you're more than doubling your money.... LOL leprechaun economics right here.

    https:// i.imgur. com/NxFzgii.png

    250% return, this is better than bitcoin :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,601 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Corkbiiy wrote: »
    have a look at this gem,

    the present value of the investment is only 2.3bn, total return of 5.7bn (3 odd bn profit), you're more than doubling your money.... LOL leprechaun economics right here.

    https:// i.imgur. com/NxFzgii.png

    250% return, this is better than bitcoin :D

    The demand for travel actually seems relatively conservative, just over a 50% increase on 2011 numbers??


  • Registered Users Posts: 24 Corkbiiy


    snotboogie wrote: »
    The demand for travel actually seems relatively conservative, just over a 50% increase on 2011 numbers??

    again, i'm not a traffic engineer/planner so I'm only speculating

    you see the population increase isn't that big, you're only increasing by 186k on 2011 levels by 2040, and also if you look at the dockland development plans, the plan is to contain the sprawl so seems reasonable

    all the technical stuff seems great to me, very reasonable, I just don't think 2.3bn in current money is what this is going to cost, for reference, metrolink alone is 5bn in today's money, a hospital is 2bn, yet we can get busconnects, a luas, new motorways, all for 2.3??


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,553 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    Corkbiiy. Thanks for all the insider knowledge. I have to ask though. Why are you posting links with gaps in them?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,927 ✭✭✭Cherry_Cola


    Corkbiiy. Thanks for all the insider knowledge. I have to ask though. Why are you posting links with gaps in them?


    New posters with less than 25 posts are unable to post links, so that's a workaround.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,244 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    The proposed alignment on the map through Bishopstown looks curious. Granted the map lacks detail and it's just an early overview but looks like it runs along the back of CUH and through/close to CSN and Bishopstown GAA club.


  • Registered Users Posts: 574 ✭✭✭Aontachtoir


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    The proposed alignment on the map through Bishopstown looks curious. Granted the map lacks detail and it's just an early overview but looks like it runs along the back of CUH and through/close to CSN and Bishopstown GAA club.

    It would have to go down Melbourn Road and up Curraheen Road to CUH, no? Don't see any other way to fit it without CPOing and demolishing a lot of houses, which will presumably not happen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,244 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    It would have to go down Melbourn Road and up Curraheen Road to CUH, no? Don't see any other way to fit it without CPOing and demolishing a lot of houses, which will presumably not happen.

    Not according to the map. Plus you wouldn't want the tram competing with car traffic on the same road if at all possible otherwise defeats the purpose.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 574 ✭✭✭Aontachtoir


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    Not according to the map. Plus you wouldn't want the tram competing with car traffic on the same road if at all possible otherwise defeats the purpose.

    The map does not look like it is intended to be taken completely to scale - more like a map of the London Underground. The plans seem to be to build the Bus Rapid Transit corridors first, then add the light rail along them at a later point. So it would make sense for the light rail to end up taking that route (after a few metres are added either side of the road).


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,244 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    18-washington-street-amended-nov-20-1024x769-1165x665.jpg

    12-kent-rail-station-amended-nov-14-2-1024x683-1165x665.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 83 ✭✭sheff_


    It would have to go down Melbourn Road and up Curraheen Road to CUH, no? Don't see any other way to fit it without CPOing and demolishing a lot of houses, which will presumably not happen.

    If you move the entrance of bishopstown comm a bit you could run a corridor up from Melbourne to bishopstown gaa, then run a corridor between the gaa and highfield pitches, then between csn and highfield and you’re through to the hospital grounds. Already an entrance to the hospital from wilton road if you want to avoid cpo-ing any houses there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 83 ✭✭sheff_


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    18-washington-street-amended-nov-20-1024x769-1165x665.jpg
    Will the taxis be blocking the tram lane or the car lane?


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    sheff_ wrote: »
    Will the taxis be blocking the tram lane or the car lane?

    And the cyclists


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭kub


    At the rate of when planned changes and projects actually happen in Cork.

    I have a feeling that many of us will be in the next world or whatever folk believe, by the time any of that stuff happens in reality.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,700 ✭✭✭fonecrusher1


    kub wrote: »
    At the rate of when planned changes and projects actually happen in Cork.

    I have a feeling that many of us will be in the next world or whatever folk believe, by the time any of that stuff happens in reality.

    The renderings are cool and all but it don't amount to a hill of beans. At the rate things are progressing give it a few decades. :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 991 ✭✭✭MrDerp


    sheff_ wrote: »
    If you move the entrance of bishopstown comm a bit you could run a corridor up from Melbourne to bishopstown gaa, then run a corridor between the gaa and highfield pitches, then between csn and highfield and you’re through to the hospital grounds. Already an entrance to the hospital from wilton road if you want to avoid cpo-ing any houses there.

    That’s what I was thinking. CPO of highfield top pitch and back of CSN pitches. Then you just run through the perimeter of the hospital grounds but I would CPO 2-4 houses on Wilton road to create a tram only turn from Wilton road, the existing portal is quite narrow.

    It’s much less disruptive than running all the way down Bishopstown road, and captures a bit more of the population without removing a man artery completely.

    With a tram covering the 208 corridor from CUH you’d need to reimagine the 205 and 208 routes somewhat. 208 perhaps following the 216 route from CUH to town, 205 turning in CIT itself somewhere instead of looping up Rossa ave, or being replaced by a more frequent Ballincollig service using college road.


  • Registered Users Posts: 83 ✭✭sheff_


    MrDerp wrote: »

    It’s much less disruptive than running all the way down Bishopstown road, and captures a bit more of the population without removing a man artery completely.

    Yip, other than a stretch on Melbourne there’s the potential for a fully off road line from the end of Ballincollig all the way into wilton road that would still service b’collig, the planned science park, cit, cuh/wilton. Between that and the old railway line from docklands to Mahon you’d have a huge chunk segregated.
    Would like to think at some point they’d look at extending along the north side of the estuary from Mahon back to Douglas.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    MrDerp wrote: »
    That’s what I was thinking. CPO of highfield top pitch and back of CSN pitches. Then you just run through the perimeter of the hospital grounds but I would CPO 2-4 houses on Wilton road to create a tram only turn from Wilton road, the existing portal is quite narrow.

    It’s much less disruptive than running all the way down Bishopstown road, and captures a bit more of the population without removing a man artery completely.

    With a tram covering the 208 corridor from CUH you’d need to reimagine the 205 and 208 routes somewhat. 208 perhaps following the 216 route from CUH to town, 205 turning in CIT itself somewhere instead of looping up Rossa ave, or being replaced by a more frequent Ballincollig service using college road.

    CPO of pitches from a college and local club?


Advertisement