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

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.