Proposed Eastern Bridge at the Riverside (mod warning, #137)

Buford T Justice

cranresident wrote: »

No I didn't say that you made a remark regarding us been willing to sacrifice your community for ours, I was merely pointing out the same could be said for you. There is a bigger picture here the development of Sligo, jobs for our children, access to the hospital etc this is not just about Cranmore and Doorly Park.

What im saying is we were put into this predicument by our councillors who have known since 2007 the projects were linked. They decided to sacrifice our community for yours as well as the rest of Sligo, We were abandend by the coucillors and its plain to see that, we asked them time and time again was our funding in jepordy and they denied it. We were been told by the Regen office it was, so we asked for the documentation to prove it as we did not believe our local representitives would do that to us. But they did, surely you can see that. We have spent housrs upon hours going through the documentation. It must be nice to have the support of the councillors, I wont comment any further but at the end of the day facts are facts, and I cant help wondering are you not annoyed at the councillors for signing off on the Gateway Inovation submission that clearly linked the two projects and if we had the councillors sign a pledge to our campaign do you really think they would be with you now?

I wasn't commenting on you're post, I was referring to what Redarmyblues said. I agree with you cranresident.

Essexboy

irish-stew wrote: »

That is one thing that annoys me about that bridge, heading south, its not even properly sign posted that the left lane is for town/N4 and right lane for Ballest Quay only. I have made the mistake once that its a filter lane as aproaching the lights and then not being able to go straight on. I have also been on my bike, waiting at the top of the queue in the filter lane for the lights to turn green allowing me to turn right into Ballest Quay, and a driver behind me second in the queue, beeping who wanted to go straght on towards the N4, wouldn't have minded but you could have passed a truck between the two of us had the left lane been clear.

There was this homemade attempt by Sligo Corporation to improve signage!
100_0132.jpg

tuppence

Maybe its just me, or is anyone else feeling this? I am finding the coverage of this issue in the main local paper extremely one sided. Front page again over a march with 40 people.
Actually beginning to creep the life outa me- feel theres fierce emotive manipulation going on. Everyone believes that Cranmore should be funded for regeneration by central governement but should it be at any cost..... Should it be over the demise of another neighbourhood that may not be as well mobilised, lobby so well and be as well connected with the local media.

And thats not even mentioning the act of environmental vandalism that a bridge would cause imo.:(:(

locomo

tuppence wrote: »

And thats not even mentioning the act of environmental vandalism that a bridge would cause imo.:(:(

Of course building a bridge at the Riverside , in such an area of natural beauty which inspired Yeats etc, would be a huge backward step and an act of environmental vandalism. It will never get built though, at least not in the next 5 or 10 years, because there is no money in the government coffers for it. What they should do, at relatively little cost or negligible cost, is reduce the footpath width on Hughes bridge, and have an extra lane of traffic there, and redo signage etc.

redarmyblues

tuppence wrote: »

Maybe its just me, or is anyone else feeling this? I am finding the coverage of this issue in the main local paper extremely one sided. Front page again over a march with 40 people.
Actually beginning to creep the life outa me- feel theres fierce emotive manipulation going on. Everyone believes that Cranmore should be funded for regeneration by central governement but should it be at any cost..... Should it be over the demise of another neighbourhood that may not be as well mobilised, lobby so well and be as well connected with the local media.

And thats not even mentioning the act of environmental vandalism that a bridge would cause imo.:(:(

The local rags have run little else but the Eastern Bridge articles the last few weeks, all non stories. The funny thing is that judging by post counts on here, people are far more concerned about the best local chipper.

The people who write the advertising cheques are writing the stories in the Chumpion and Weakender, but why, oh why are they so incredibly excercised by this issue, that they sullied their shiny loafers in the Abbeyquarter Community Centre, (I bet none of them were ever in Cranmore on foot before) when surely the most important local infrastructure story is the Colloney to Castlebaldwin N4, where the crosses by the roadside speak far more eloquently than all the CoC/FF ERC shill about what we require as a county.

The ERC and Cranmore regeneration linkage will die with the present government, that is before the summer comes, word also is that the County Managers contract is nearly up but will not be renewed. So if there is funds available CranRegen will then happen on its own merits and the Cranmore residents will think more carefully about who they accept, (and when I say accept I do not mean choose) as friends in the future.

Mint Sauce

Personal opinon, and dont know a huge amount on the topic, but I understand a huge amount of money has already been spent on this to date, and it was my understanding that money had been put aside to develop the area including the building of the bridge.

Unfortunatly Cranmore is in an isolated areas and all roads into it seem to be a bottle neck at the best of times, and unfortunatly the natural architecture of the area, the park and the garavouge makes it difficult for it to be developed and the access in and out of it. But yes, I think its needed both for the furture development of the area and the good of the town. Take the hospital and the IT, both also difficult areas to get to, this redelopment would surely also assist that side of the river and improve access there as well, and take the pressure of a congested releif road and Hughs bridge.

From my time living in Sligo the Co Council as far as the town is concerned are wasting money on ideas that go no where or are spent on roads that go no where, examples are O'Connell street, and the outer releif road at Kevinsfort, any time been on it I have been one of no more than two cars, and now the Eastern Bridge and Cranmore.

Buford T Justice

tuppence wrote: »

Maybe its just me, or is anyone else feeling this? I am finding the coverage of this issue in the main local paper extremely one sided. Front page again over a march with 40 people.
Actually beginning to creep the life outa me- feel theres fierce emotive manipulation going on. Everyone believes that Cranmore should be funded for regeneration by central governement but should it be at any cost..... Should it be over the demise of another neighbourhood that may not be as well mobilised, lobby so well and be as well connected with the local media.

And thats not even mentioning the act of environmental vandalism that a bridge would cause imo.:(:(

Really, and you firmly believe that building the eastern bridge is going to completely destroy the doorly park area? Thats preposterous.

Its called progress, and its an absolute disgrace that for a so called 'city' the only way to get northside from the southside is via two lanes on one bridge on one side of the town. If people are served with CPO's for their houses in doorly park, the majority of them will be delighted to get the money and be gone with it. Sure you can't please everyone, but that's life

redarmyblues wrote: »

The local rags have run little else but the Eastern Bridge articles the last few weeks, all non stories. The funny thing is that judging by post counts on here, people are far more concerned about the best local chipper.

That's a false comparison and you're not comparing like for like. The chipper thread is ongoing a lot longer than this one, and is about a completely different and lighthearted topic.

redarmyblues wrote: »

The people who write the advertising cheques are writing the stories in the Chumpion and Weakender, but why, oh why are they so incredibly excercised by this issue, that they sullied their shiny loafers in the Abbeyquarter Community Centre, (I bet none of them were ever in Cranmore on foot before) when surely the most important local infrastructure story is the Colloney to Castlebaldwin N4, where the crosses by the roadside speak far more eloquently than all the CoC/FF ERC shill about what we require as a county.#

What are you inferring about the abbeyquarter community center here? There are many issues facing this town and county, just because you prioritise one over another, doesn't mean everyone else should or does.

tedshredsonfire

red army I was there but not in my shiny loafers. i grew up on pearse road which when i was growing up was no mans land you wern't a townie and you wernt a buff. Since then I see most people saw pearse road as a well to do spot but it didn't really feel like that in the eighties. I was in cranmore many times and got a few slaps for my trouble from i think the storm was the gang at the time. I have family in laws living in cranmore whom I respect as well as any one else. I think you still see us living in robin hoods time with the rich and the poor and be careful who you choose as your friends ffs? there are plenty of assholes in cranmore and doorly park and martin savage terrace same as there are plenty of assholes on pearse road, rosses point etc but thank god most people in most places are good and want whats best for themselves, their children, and their town.
the idea you seem to be pushing that cogs and wheels are turning and are being manipulated of course they are because a small group from a small area of the town have been given a written promise from the councillors that the bridge will not go through, theres your conspiracy red because in my stupidity I thought they would try and take in all opinions of the town and people that elected them before making a decision of no bridge here to suit a few people who will unfortunatly be majorly inconvienced.

redarmyblues

Fingers McGee wrote: »

Really, and you firmly believe that building the eastern bridge is going to completely destroy the doorly park area? Thats preposterous.

Its called progress, and its an absolute disgrace that for a so called 'city' the only way to get northside from the southside is via two lanes on one bridge on one side of the town. If people are served with CPO's for their houses in doorly park, the majority of them will be delighted to get the money and be gone with it. Sure you can't please everyone, but that's life


That's a false comparison and you're not comparing like for like. The chipper thread is ongoing a lot longer than this one, and is about a completely different and lighthearted topic.


What are you inferring about the abbeyquarter community center here? There are many issues facing this town and county, just because you prioritise one over another, doesn't mean everyone else should or does.

The EIS acknowledges that the scheme will cause major disruption to residents.

Its not called progress its called bad planning.

The people who brought you "the disgrace" you post about i.e. the disaster that is the Mid Block Route or Inner Relief Road, are the CoC and Sligo CoCo the same people. behind this project.

There are no CPO's for dwellings in Doorly Park/Martin Savage merely for front gardens.

The chip shop thread is much younger than this.

I was not inferring anything about Abbeyquarter C.C I was implying something vis a vis the Cashmere Coats from the CoC sudden fawning concern for Cranmore.

redarmyblues

tedshredsonfire wrote: »

red army I was there but not in my shiny loafers. i grew up on pearse road which when i was growing up was no mans land you wern't a townie and you wernt a buff. Since then I see most people saw pearse road as a well to do spot but it didn't really feel like that in the eighties. I was in cranmore many times and got a few slaps for my trouble from i think the storm was the gang at the time. I have family in laws living in cranmore whom I respect as well as any one else. I think you still see us living in robin hoods time with the rich and the poor and be careful who you choose as your friends ffs? there are plenty of assholes in cranmore and doorly park and martin savage terrace same as there are plenty of assholes on pearse road, rosses point etc but thank god most people in most places are good and want whats best for themselves, their children, and their town.
the idea you seem to be pushing that cogs and wheels are turning and are being manipulated of course they are because a small group from a small area of the town have been given a written promise from the councillors that the bridge will not go through, theres your conspiracy red because in my stupidity I thought they would try and take in all opinions of the town and people that elected them before making a decision of no bridge here to suit a few people who will unfortunatly be majorly inconvienced.

Please stay on topic and save the life history for your Autobiography, as far as i know nobody in Sligo elected you to represent it on this issue, your opinions are your own not those of Sligo, so please restrain from presenting them as such. I also suspect since you are a CoC job and as such live in Strandhill or Rosses Point that you don't even have a vote for SBC elections.

If I remember a small group from a small area of Sligo were successful in having the Western Bypass removed from the CDP, please explain why you and the CoC, Chumpion/ Weakender and the local branch of our degenerate ruling Party are not campaigning to have this very important plan reinstated, and while you are at it please explain why the MBR was built instead of a WBP in defiance of standard practice. Sligo is believed to be the only town in Europe to have opted to drive a National Primaty route through its Centre since the sixties.

Buford T Justice

redarmyblues wrote: »

The EIS acknowledges that the scheme will cause major disruption to residents.

Any construction work is going to cause disruption. Thats unavoidable. We had works done in our street a while ago to improve parking and it caused disruption whilst it was ongoing. Just a fact.

Have you moved on from demise to disruption now?

redarmyblues wrote: »

The people who brought you "the disgrace" you post about i.e. the disaster that is the Mid Block Route or Inner Relief Road, are the CoC and Sligo CoCo the same people. behind this project.

I'm not talking about the inner relief road, or the mid block route. I'm talking about Hughes bridge being the only main bridge for access to the north.

The Council? The Councillors? They're a bunch of morons. They decide to proceed with the most ridiculous of plans that are conjured up and object to the ones that actually make sense. Go figure!


There are no CPO's for dwellings in Doorly Park/Martin Savage merely for front gardens.

redarmyblues wrote: »

The chip shop thread is much younger than this.

Big wop, its still not a like for like subject.

tedshredsonfire

red I have always stated I was in the coc on these boards. I was not in coc when the mbr was proposed and would have favoured a bypass. I live in oakfield so yes I have a sbc vote but does it matter? Are the people of drumcliffe or strandhill or rosses point or anywhere else not entitled to have an opinion on a major infastructural piece for sligo simply because they are not in the borough?
the only thoughts I can offer on why the wbp is not being as strongly contetsed is because the money is not allocated for it, the planning process has not being gone through with where as the bridge has gone to the highest planning authority in the land and the money is there for it to begin but Sligo cant get its act together and get it through so like the cranmore money this will probably go to some other town.

redarmyblues

You are right you were always up front about being a member of the CoC, so in Fairness I must admit I am from the West ward though work in the East, I campaigned against the MBR and I am still in the trenches over that. I still remain in principle opposed to driving roads through resdential areas. To my discredit I was slightly in favour of the WDR, which now that the folly is seen of chewing up a park and a residential area to no apparent purpose, I repent entirely of.

Maybe the yes lobby are right, though I remain unconvinced that building an Eastern River Crossing is vital to "progress" in Sligo, even if you are right does it have to be that exact design with that exact conformation. As I understand it the CoCo had only one meeting with residents 3 or 4 years ago and that after the meeting sentiment was much in favour of a bridge but no particular site was agreed. It was not until the insensitivity of the Councils plans became apparent that attitudes hardened. If the CoCo had spent a fraction on the amount expended so far on consultation they would have at least, a bridge at the planning stage.

In terms of the planning I believe that under new the fast track planning only once has the deciding body or An Bord Pleannala found against an application (and that was for guess what? a mid block route) in Athy whereby it was ruled against because it would not function either as a Bypass or a street., sound familiar?

I forgot to add, no funds could be available for a WBP because it never got beyond the design stage, it was removed (I believe that after extensive consultation between residents and the CoCo) because the residents sucessfully lobbied Coucilllors to remove the WBP from the CDP.

cranresident

redarmyblues wrote: »

The local rags have run little else but the Eastern Bridge articles the last few weeks, all non stories. The funny thing is that judging by post counts on here, people are far more concerned about the best local chipper.

The people who write the advertising cheques are writing the stories in the Chumpion and Weakender, but why, oh why are they so incredibly excercised by this issue, that they sullied their shiny loafers in the Abbeyquarter Community Centre, (") when surely the most important local infrastructure story is the Colloney to Castlebaldwin N4, where the crosses by the roadside speak far more eloquently than all the CoC/FF ERC shill about what we require as a county.

The ERC and Cranmore regeneration linkage will die with the present government, that is before the summer comes, word also is that the County Managers contract is nearly up but will not be renewed. So if there is funds available CranRegen will then happen on its own merits and the Cranmore residents will think more carefully about who they accept, (and when I say accept I do not mean choose) as friends in the future.

We certainly will be careful, and we wont be choosing those councillors who told us that our funding was not in jepordy if the bridge was deleted from the plan on three different occasions, and what funding have we lost €6million. We will continue to research and read all documentation carefully. As for your comment regarding "I bet none of them were ever in Cranmore on foot before", it is evident you support the division of the classes but thank god not all are as suspicious as you. Why would a working class community and business community want to join forces, TO SAVE SLIGO!

cranresident

Fingers McGee wrote: »

I wasn't commenting on you're post, I was referring to what Redarmyblues said. I agree with you cranresident.

Sorry, that was meant for redarmyblues.

redarmyblues

cranresident wrote: »

We certainly will be careful, and we wont be choosing those councillors who told us that our funding was not in jepordy if the bridge was deleted from the plan on three different occasions, and what funding have we lost €6million. We will continue to research and read all documentation carefully. As for your comment regarding "I bet none of them were ever in Cranmore on foot before", it is evident you support the division of the classes but thank god not all are as suspicious as you. Why would a working class community and business community want to join forces, TO SAVE SLIGO!

Your not joining forces to save Sligo, you are engaged in an alliance of expedience.

As I understand it Cranmore Regen is meant to remedy bad planning decisions made in the past and I think everyone in Sligo will agree that the problems in Cranmore are in no way the fault of its residents. The Gort bypass opened today,€209m, 22KM dual carraigeway through open country that will carry 8,000 cars a day, while in comparison the Eastern Bridge is meant (according to the EIS) to carry 20,000 cars a day on single carriageway through residential areas, this can hardly be called good planning either.

Your attitude to this project is either hypocritical or despicable depending on whether you have bothered to think it out or not.

Buford T Justice

redarmyblues wrote: »

Your not joining forces to save Sligo, you are engaged in an alliance of expedience.

As I understand it Cranmore Regen is meant to remedy bad planning decisions made in the past and I think everyone in Sligo will agree that the problems in Cranmore are in no way the fault of its residents.

You're missing the point here. Cranmore residents were told before voting that they were in full support of the regeneration, and the eastern bridge. I heard the interviews myself on Ocean FM. The only person I can recall that was against it was Jarlath Rogers, who lets face it only got about 50 votes.

Now that everyone got their votes and are happily re-elected minds suddenly were changed and the residents of Cranmore were left in the Shit over it, after being blatantly lied to.

cranresident

redarmyblues wrote: »

Your not joining forces to save Sligo, you are engaged in an alliance of expedience.

As I understand it Cranmore Regen is meant to remedy bad planning decisions made in the past and I think everyone in Sligo will agree that the problems in Cranmore are in no way the fault of its residents. The Gort bypass opened today,€209m, 22KM dual carraigeway through open country that will carry 8,000 cars a day, while in comparison the Eastern Bridge is meant (according to the EIS) to carry 20,000 cars a day on single carriageway through residential areas, this can hardly be called good planning either.

Your attitude to this project is either hypocritical or despicable depending on whether you have bothered to think it out or not.

So why remove the bridge from the plan, and not look for a tonnage, downgrade of the bridge, re-design of approach roads. If the problem is not the bridge itself but the approach road then why not work on that instead of removing the bridge from the plan that has been there for 37 years. Is removing a vital piece of infrastructure from the development plan to solve one problem (indirectly), and causing lasting problems to the rest of Sligo good planning? The problem is not with the bridge its with the approach roads so where is the campaign for this? One small community get there way to the expense of the rest of Sligo. Its not me that has not thought the thing out?

Mint Sauce

Interesting article in todays Indo, looks like the gloves could be off as far as the regeneration money is concerned.

Article.

Essexboy

the plan that has been there for 37 years

Is not that part of the problem? A plan drawn up in a different era is not the plan for today's Sligo. This is how we got the awful Hughes Bridge: a plan devised in the 1960s and railroaded through to suit a handful of people.

redarmyblues

irish-stew wrote: »

Interesting article in todays Indo, looks like the gloves could be off as far as the regeneration money is concerned.

Article.

The Champion has been running this same(non) story regularly on its front page for months, the fact the indo ran it shows the Doyles have suck with Independent Media, no more.

michael Finnernan reminds me of Hitler in his bunker during the last days of the Reich, ordering phantom divisions to final victory against the Allies and the Chumpion is the Nazi propaganda machine repeating his deluded pronouncements,

Gipo3

Just a poll to see who is in favour or against the Eastern Bridge as originally planned.

redarmyblues

redarmyblues wrote: »

The Champion has been running this same(non) story regularly on its front page for months, the fact the indo ran it shows the Doyles have suck with Independent Media, no more.

michael Finnernan reminds me of Hitler in his bunker during the last days of the Reich, ordering phantom divisions to final victory against the Allies and the Chumpion is the Nazi propaganda machine repeating his deluded pronouncements,

I forgot to mention that the
Chumpion and the indo as both owned by tony o reilly of "independent" media, and prime time tonigt reminds that the plutocratic vice stil holds sway here.

Sligored

from ocean fm webite - great news in my opinion

Eastern Bridge project in Sligo put back into Development plan

The controversial Eastern Bridge project in Sligo has been put back in the Sligo Development Plan.

The casting vote of the Mayor of Sligo, Cllr Matt Lyons, at last night's special meeting of the Borough Council ensured the project is now in a position to proceed.

The absence of two of the twelve councillors on the night was crucial in the overall vote.

Both Cllr Rosaleen O'Grady and Cllr Tony McLoughlin, who were both missing for personal reasons, had previously voted against the Bridge proceeding.

In the end, the proposal to have the Bridge put back in the Development Plan was tied at five votes apiece, with the Mayor's casting vote proving crucial.

The Minister for Housing had given the council until the end of the year to approve the Bridge project, or else risk losing a potential 120 million euro in funding for the regeneration of the Eastern quadrant of the town.

Following the meeting, residents in the Riverside area opposed to the Bridge going ahead insisted their campaign would continue.

my reading is that bree , mcmanus x 2 gibbons , and marcela mcgarry opposed the bridge and lyons , cawley x 2 , jimmy mcgarry and devins supported the proposal.

Gipo3

Great news, hopefully we wont have to wait too long for the construction now.

garth-marenghi

Its a sad day when such cynical political manipulation and financial blackmail pits two communities against each other. Nobody would want to see the cranmore community deprived of needed funds but when its on these terms it leaves a bad taste in the mouth. This is no great news or time for celebration. Well done to those councillors who continued to stick to their original views and didnt bow to a sustained one sided media campaign.

cranresident

garth-marenghi wrote: »

Its a sad day when such cynical political manipulation and financial blackmail pits two communities against each other. Nobody would want to see the cranmore community deprived of needed funds but when its on these terms it leaves a bad taste in the mouth. This is no great news or time for celebration. Well done to those councillors who continued to stick to their original views and didnt bow to a sustained one sided media campaign.

But they did not stick to their original views as they lobbyed for the Eastern Link Bridge for years. They were so desperate to keep their votes they signed a pledge without thinking of the consequences and some admitted without even reading the pledge or the GIF, or much much more documentation. The problem is we have not been keeping our eye on this council but I would ask all Sligo residents to make sure that they challenge councillors to act with integrity this Kangaroo behaviour is not acceptable. I dont agree that 2 communities have been pitted against eachother this is another smoke screen by some councillors to take the heat of them. I do agree some councillors have tried to pitt them against eachother but that cant happen unless we let them.

Ned Green

Now that the eastern bridge is now back on the development plan,has the necessary funding for Cranmore regeneration been released by Minister Finneran?.

shellyriver

Isn't it obvious that this Bridge is simply to open up link to vast zone land at Hazlewood and potential land bank at Race course?

I mean, aside to the illogicallity of squeezing the Bridge in at its location, aesthetically it is a hideous monstrosity and totally unnecessary in scale.

The beauty and tranquilty of Doorly Park and Cleveragh has been severed to permit this bridge.

Very convenient that it was all pushed through at Xmas, and Finneran is now off the scene. Master stroke!

To my mind - the whole of Cranmore should be demolished before a Bridge is put across the Water at Buckley's Ford.

Regeneration? What a laugh! What a disgusting end game. Spineless politicians, changing position etc.

I feel sorry for anyone living in Martin Savage Tce, Garavogue and Doorly Park, this Bridge is a travesty -- justified on the pretence of development of a sad, tawdry, architecturally and broken identity estate.

This might sound Machievellian, but I believe that a certain politican's supporters are happy for Cranmore to limp along as perversely it maintains there electoral base.

Sad day for Sligo.

cranresident

shellyriver wrote: »

Isn't it obvious that this Bridge is simply to open up link to vast zone land at Hazlewood and potential land bank at Race course?

I mean, aside to the illogicallity of squeezing the Bridge in at its location, aesthetically it is a hideous monstrosity and totally unnecessary in scale.

The beauty and tranquilty of Doorly Park and Cleveragh has been severed to permit this bridge.

Very convenient that it was all pushed through at Xmas, and Finneran is now off the scene. Master stroke!

To my mind - the whole of Cranmore should be demolished before a Bridge is put across the Water at Buckley's Ford.

Regeneration? What a laugh! What a disgusting end game. Spineless politicians, changing position etc.

I feel sorry for anyone living in Martin Savage Tce, Garavogue and Doorly Park, this Bridge is a travesty -- justified on the pretence of development of a sad, tawdry, architecturally and broken identity estate.

This might sound Machievellian, but I believe that a certain politican's supporters are happy for Cranmore to limp along as perversely it maintains there electoral base.

Sad day for Sligo.

You need to keep your eye all the ball, the reason why it was pushed through before Christmas was because the councillors have been avoiding a decsion until pressure was put on them. They had fourteen months to decide.

Anyway anyone who would suggest wiping out a community of aprox 2000 does not show much integrity etc. Off to some of the third world villages with you with your ethnic cleansing attitude.

Ned Green

cranresident wrote: »

You need to keep your eye all the ball, the reason why it was pushed through before Christmas was because the councillors have been avoiding a decsion until pressure was put on them. They had fourteen months to decide.

Anyway anyone who would suggest wiping out a community of aprox 2000 does not show much integrity etc. Off to some of the third world villages with you with your ethnic cleansing attitude.

Still does not answer my original question.Have any new funds for the much needed regeneration been received yet,if not "Why Not"and "If Not"when can the community expect them,now that the bridge is firmly back in the plans.Can anyone give me answers.?.

cranresident

Ned Green wrote: »

Still does not answer my original question.Have any new funds for the much needed regeneration been received yet,if not "Why Not"and "If Not"when can the community expect them,now that the bridge is firmly back in the plans.Can anyone give me answers.?.

Oh come on it was only put back on the plan on the 22nd December. The department then have to get the official word. Between that and christmas and the goverment holidays its going to take time. And I am pressuming that there will be a lot of paper work cos the Borough Council threw away 3.5 million last year and then 2.5 million the year before. The tendering process will take time also. And the money isn't just handed over like that, if it was we would not of lost the above funding. Regeneration is a very slow process, as is any govement funded project. It was stated at the Borough Council meeting that it will take 18months before we see any physical changes in Cranmore Regeneration. Also there has to be a second vote of the Borough council to keep the bridge on the plan (remember that happened when it was taken off). I will find out if money has been released for the cleveragh park development and get back to you.

Ned Green

cranresident wrote: »

Oh come on it was only put back on the plan on the 22nd December. The department then have to get the official word. Between that and christmas and the goverment holidays its going to take time. And I am pressuming that there will be a lot of paper work cos the Borough Council threw away 3.5 million last year and then 2.5 million the year before. The tendering process will take time also. And the money isn't just handed over like that, if it was we would not of lost the above funding. Regeneration is a very slow process, as is any govement funded project. It was stated at the Borough Council meeting that it will take 18months before we see any physical changes in Cranmore Regeneration. Also there has to be a second vote of the Borough council to keep the bridge on the plan (remember that happened when it was taken off). I will find out if money has been released for the cleveragh park development and get back to you.

Thanks for the reply.I hope everything is in place before Minister Finneran leaves office sometime in March or April.

shellyriver

Anyway anyone who would suggest wiping out a community of aprox 2000 does not show much integrity etc. Off to some of the third world villages with you with your ethnic cleansing attitude. - Cranresident...

Integrity -- I doubt you know the meaning of the word. I would suspect you either work in the Cranmore 'Regeneration' office or are connected to it.


'Wiping out'?? 'Ethnic Cleansing'? Give me a break. Its a horrid estate, always was, always will be.

At least one time there was a bit of community spirit there, but with many moving from the time Crozon was built (ie their own money) or new Caltragh was build (another sink estate -- with anybody to use a generalisation 'decent' trying to get out -- but now its just a sad, sad place.

My point is that to to sacrifice the real natural beauty of Cleveragh and Fenton's Quay, along with completing destroying the tranquility of what is a lovely environment around Garavouge and Martin Savage -- for the sake of a do-gooder scheme, that is even accepted by many in Cranmore as being an abysmal failure, is just vomit.

Why was there a link between the funding? Because idiots like you would say we are going to lose money to regenerate the estate.

(PS - If would be very easy to make Corkrans Mall, the Old Bridge and up the Mall a one way system and/or 'sup up Hughes Bridge' where the town centre is already scarred - to get people over to the IT, hosptial wherever -- but no, because there is more money to be made elsewhere and it can be justified firstly as a 'city status project' and then 'regenerating a deprived area' this carbunkle is constructed.

Please people are not fools. Not to long ago this Council wanted to pay a few Million Euros for a walkway from the Slip to the Glasshouse -- planning, prudent spending, big picture, they are clueless.

Of course Cranmore is a broken estate, if it was not you wouldn't need to 'regnerate' it.

In any event, I personally, doubt any of it will make any real difference re Regneration of lifes. It just typical of the worst elements of Nanny Statism re Cranmore and then Developer Ireland local government re a huge and unnessary bridge on the other side.

Your concept of your 'regeneration at the social cost of other communities' ie by Riverside, therefore you are simply selfish, self-serving and duplicitious -- that is a better definition of lacking integrity.

bobcar61

shellyriver wrote: »

Anyway anyone who would suggest wiping out a community of aprox 2000 does not show much integrity etc. Off to some of the third world villages with you with your ethnic cleansing attitude. - Cranresident...

Integrity -- I doubt you know the meaning of the word. I would suspect you either work in the Cranmore 'Regeneration' office or are connected to it.


'Wiping out'?? 'Ethnic Cleansing'? Give me a break. Its a horrid estate, always was, always will be.

At least one time there was a bit of community spirit there, but with many moving from the time Crozon was built (ie their own money) or new Caltragh was build (another sink estate -- with anybody to use a generalisation 'decent' trying to get out -- but now its just a sad, sad place.

My point is that to to sacrifice the real natural beauty of Cleveragh and Fenton's Quay, along with completing destroying the tranquility of what is a lovely environment around Garavouge and Martin Savage -- for the sake of a do-gooder scheme, that is even accepted by many in Cranmore as being an abysmal failure, is just vomit.

Why was there a link between the funding? Because idiots like you would say we are going to lose money to regenerate the estate.

(PS - If would be very easy to make Corkrans Mall, the Old Bridge and up the Mall a one way system and/or 'sup up Hughes Bridge' where the town centre is already scarred - to get people over to the IT, hosptial wherever -- but no, because there is more money to be made elsewhere and it can be justified firstly as a 'city status project' and then 'regenerating a deprived area' this carbunkle is constructed.

Please people are not fools. Not to long ago this Council wanted to pay a few Million Euros for a walkway from the Slip to the Glasshouse -- planning, prudent spending, big picture, they are clueless.

Of course Cranmore is a broken estate, if it was not you wouldn't need to 'regnerate' it.

In any event, I personally, doubt any of it will make any real difference re Regneration of lifes. It just typical of the worst elements of Nanny Statism re Cranmore and then Developer Ireland local government re a huge and unnessary bridge on the other side.

Your concept of your 'regeneration at the social cost of other communities' ie by Riverside, therefore you are simply selfish, self-serving and duplicitious -- that is a better definition of lacking integrity.

Quite the insult there shellyriver implying that cranresident lacks intelligence as he comes from cranmore and then going on to call him an idiot.

There is no way Cranmore should be demolished, where are you going to house everybody? It's the largest housing estate in Sligo so it's just just not feasible knocking the whole thing to the ground.

Mint Sauce

Please keep the personal insults out of it guys and girls. Attack the post not the poster.

shellyriver

bobcar61 wrote: »

There is no way Cranmore should be demolished, where are you going to house everybody? It's the largest housing estate in Sligo so it's just just not feasible knocking the whole thing to the ground.

I didn't say knock it all down -- although it would not be a bad idea. It would be much cheaper now property values on the floor -- particularly the area from old Carroll Drive to Cranmore Drive.

Unlike when the Corporation have already vastly over paid residents to move out, ie at Benson Drive and Carroll Drive as part of this regeneration programme.

What I say was that I would prefer for all the housing hear to be demolished before Cleveragh and Back Avenue is destroyed for this ridiculous and hideous brigde and attendant traffic.

PS - I said the necessity and logic behind a pracitcal linking of funding between this Bridge and developing of Cranmore is idiotic - it is. I stand over it. I didn't say because you are a from Cranmore you are a Cran-moron, that's just a patent misreading and/or misunderstanding of what I wrote.

sligopark

shellyriver wrote: »

Isn't it obvious that this Bridge is simply to open up link to vast zone land at Hazlewood and potential land bank at Race course?

surely this land couldn't be owned by vested political interests???!!!! :eek:;)

bobcar61

shellyriver wrote: »

To my mind - the whole of Cranmore should be demolished before a Bridge is put across the Water at Buckley's Ford.

shellyriver wrote: »

I didn't say knock it all down -- although it would not be a bad idea. It would be much cheaper now property values on the floor -- particularly the area from old Carroll Drive to Cranmore Drive......

....I didn't say because you are a from Cranmore you are a Cran-moron, that's just a patent misreading and/or misunderstanding of what I wrote.

The last time I checked demolished and knocking it all down meant the same thing....no?

And in what post did I say I was from Cranmore or that I am a Cran-moran? Looks like it was you with the patent misreading and/or misunderstanding.

Anyways, I'm all for the bridge, the sooner the better I say. Think of the hospital for example, at the moment the only way that an ambulance can get from lets say for example Cranmore, is to go through the town and around either on Adelaide Street, down O'Connell Street or on the Inner Relief Road, all busy roads. And with only one lane on Castle Street/Gratten Street and O'Connell Street, it's near impossible to weave through traffic and therefore taking so long. Think how much easier it would be for so many people if the bridge was in pace.

shellyriver

bobcar61 wrote: »

Quite the insult there shellyriver implying that cranresident lacks intelligence as he comes from cranmore and then going on to call him an idiot.

There is no way Cranmore should be demolished, where are you going to house everybody? It's the largest housing estate in Sligo so it's just just not feasible knocking the whole thing to the ground.

Sorry you seem to have to construed my response to the above comment as a personalised attack. It wasn't.

Many comments on this thread seem to be people reading semantic misunderstandings into the posts based on their own particular bias. It seems rather off point.

You're in favour of Bridge, wonderful. Obviously a fan of good planning, urban development and traffic management -- along with due consideration for resident population. Give yourself a big pat on the back!

cranresident

shellyriver wrote: »

Anyway anyone who would suggest wiping out a community of aprox 2000 does not show much integrity etc. Off to some of the third world villages with you with your ethnic cleansing attitude. - Cranresident...

Integrity -- I doubt you know the meaning of the word. I would suspect you either work in the Cranmore 'Regeneration' office or are connected to it.


'Wiping out'?? 'Ethnic Cleansing'? Give me a break. Its a horrid estate, always was, always will be.

At least one time there was a bit of community spirit there, but with many moving from the time Crozon was built (ie their own money) or new Caltragh was build (another sink estate -- with anybody to use a generalisation 'decent' trying to get out -- but now its just a sad, sad place.

My point is that to to sacrifice the real natural beauty of Cleveragh and Fenton's Quay, along with completing destroying the tranquility of what is a lovely environment around Garavouge and Martin Savage -- for the sake of a do-gooder scheme, that is even accepted by many in Cranmore as being an abysmal failure, is just vomit.

Why was there a link between the funding? Because idiots like you would say we are going to lose money to regenerate the estate.

(PS - If would be very easy to make Corkrans Mall, the Old Bridge and up the Mall a one way system and/or 'sup up Hughes Bridge' where the town centre is already scarred - to get people over to the IT, hosptial wherever -- but no, because there is more money to be made elsewhere and it can be justified firstly as a 'city status project' and then 'regenerating a deprived area' this carbunkle is constructed.

Please people are not fools. Not to long ago this Council wanted to pay a few Million Euros for a walkway from the Slip to the Glasshouse -- planning, prudent spending, big picture, they are clueless.

Of course Cranmore is a broken estate, if it was not you wouldn't need to 'regnerate' it.

In any event, I personally, doubt any of it will make any real difference re Regneration of lifes. It just typical of the worst elements of Nanny Statism re Cranmore and then Developer Ireland local government re a huge and unnessary bridge on the other side.

Your concept of your 'regeneration at the social cost of other communities' ie by Riverside, therefore you are simply selfish, self-serving and duplicitious -- that is a better definition of lacking integrity.

you obvisouly know nothing about the estate, the community spirit is greater now than ever. The only other response I will give you to the attack on our community is,
Dont know where you were brought up or where you live but I am glad your not in my community

sligopark

how is the Ward situation there regarding their memorial stones for their son who got murdered?

is there similar for the lad smyth who was shot or lynch?

cranresident

sligopark wrote: »

how is the Ward situation there regarding their memorial stones for their son who got murdered?

is there similar for the lad smyth who was shot or lynch?

Headstone still there, no there is not headstones for the two others.

cranresident

shellyriver wrote: »

I didn't say knock it all down -- although it would not be a bad idea. It would be much cheaper now property values on the floor -- particularly the area from old Carroll Drive to Cranmore Drive.

Unlike when the Corporation have already vastly over paid residents to move out, ie at Benson Drive and Carroll Drive as part of this regeneration programme.

What I say was that I would prefer for all the housing hear to be demolished before Cleveragh and Back Avenue is destroyed for this ridiculous and hideous brigde and attendant traffic.

PS - I said the necessity and logic behind a pracitcal linking of funding between this Bridge and developing of Cranmore is idiotic - it is. I stand over it. I didn't say because you are a from Cranmore you are a Cran-moron, that's just a patent misreading and/or misunderstanding of what I wrote.

But I will say it again, it was the local borough councillors who officially linked those projects in the Gateway Innovation submission in 2007. (You can view it online from the borough site). We had no say in it, and we were right about our funding we lost 6 million. The original plans for Cranmore regenration included the approach roads for the bridge, so if they were not connected why was the approach roads for the bridge included in the consultation process

sligopark

had those local councillors vested interests?

cranresident

dont honestly know. All I know is that 12 councillors signed off on the Gateway Innovation Submission in November 2007 which connects the two projects, even after some of the councillors complained early in the year that they should not be connected. Evident that most of them did not read the submission or even take much notice of the draft physical plans for the estate that included the approach roads.

At the end of the day no matter what way you look at it, they are responsible for this whole mess. We really do need a new council who are accountable and responsible for their actions.

sligopark

wasn't there a list somewhere that detailed those who would win handsomely via compulsory purchase and most had ff and business connections?

cranresident

I have never seen the list, but I have heard a couple of names of ex county councillors but not the Borough Councillors. Would be interesting to see who who but it still will not solve the problem. Actually come to think of it both of them were borough councillor a number years ago

dardevle

...

cranresident:

just a couple of queries on the subject:

when you say "the problem"- do you mean the problem of these projects being un-necessarily linked ?

or that these projects being linked went un- noticed by councillors before it had gone as far as it did?

and also if such a mistake in linking these projects was made in 2007, are you in favor of perpetuating the mistake to further your own cause?

and finally ( and you may have answered this before and if so- sorry to repeat it) are you a paid employee of the cranmore regen project?


...

gigino

sligopark wrote: »

wasn't there a list somewhere that detailed those who would win handsomely via compulsory purchase and most had ff and business connections?

What do you mean "those who would win handsomely via compulsory purchase" ? I thought it was the landowners along the route who were most against the bridge going ahead, due to
(a) the disruption / noise / inconvenience of the work
(b) the poor way the local authority / road contractor will finish work to the remaining side of any walls etc on property partly compulsory purchased
and most of all,
(c) the fact that the compensation they will get - after years of stress and meetings and sleepless nights - will only be a fraction of what the acquired property is worth ? For example, in the case of the inner relief road, there was an example of a landowner along that route losing land / having it taken over by the contractor to the road in 2004. He did not get paid for that property he lost until 2007 , and the compensation he got ( for the land / property lost ) was only a pittance - it was only half of what a similar property nearby sold for by public auction in 2004.

CPO is not compulsory purchase order - it is more like compulsory theft order.

You raise an interesting point about the ff connection though. Maybe if the landowner above was ff / not in the minority, he would not have lost so much as a result of the CPO.