When is Bishops Quay and howleys quay road reopening?

Vanquished

sleepyman wrote: »

Is O Connell St next once they're finished the quays?

There doesn't appear to be any reliable, stated time frame for the commencement of the O'Connell Street remodelling project. Certainly the urgent need for the revamp isn't matched by the pace of progression at City Council level! The street is an absolute embarrassment at this stage. The condition of the existing pavement and the general environment is truly deplorable!:o

We've been hearing about a grand master-plan for the street for over 10 years at this stage and indeed it's almost 7 years since the design spec was released.

http://www.limerickcity.ie/Transport/MajorProjects/LimerickCityCentreRemodellingandPedestrianisation/Thefile,4566,en.pdf

From what I recall the whole project is estimated to cost around €8 million. The vast bulk of this would have to come from central government funding or some form of grant assistance from EU level etc.

Limerick City Council appear to have earmarked €300,000 next year for "detailed design" of the scheme which would mean that it would be at least 2015 before any work could commence. Provided the significant funding that's required can be secured of course.

Vanquished

Beer Baron wrote: »

If it's next on the list then they'd want to get a little more organised before beginning on that street. Those footpaths really do need replacing but I'm sure the streets is full of basements as well.

I wouldn't be too bothered about that. It's a natural consequence of working in an historic urban environment. The same issues are being encountered in Dublin with the luas works. Although I would like to see those basements preserved if possible. They are an interesting facet of Limericks history.

I just wish they'd get a move on with the project now!

Berty

Vanquished wrote: »

I wouldn't be too bothered about that. It's a natural consequence of working in an historic urban environment. The same issues are being encountered in Dublin with the luas works. Although I would like to see those basements preserved if possible. They are an interesting facet of Limericks history.

I just wish they'd get a move on with the project now!

That's the thing. I was in a few basements on Thomas street since it has been redeveloped and they remain. I can never understand why William streets had to go.

Cookiemunster

Beer Baron wrote: »

That's the thing. I was in a few basements on Thomas street since it has been redeveloped and they remain. I can never understand why William streets had to go.

IIRC they said it was because of the traffic above them. There was always a danger of a collapse (apparently one happened in the late 80s / early 90s) and the works gave them the opportunity to fill them in. I assume this wasn't needed in Thomas St as it was pedestrianised.

Berty

Cookiemunster wrote: »

IIRC they said it was because of the traffic above them. There was always a danger of a collapse (apparently one happened in the late 80s / early 90s) and the works gave them the opportunity to fill them in. I assume this wasn't needed in Thomas St as it was pedestrianised.

I'm talking about upper Thomas Street though, from The Cornstore upwards where there are two lanes as well.

I know all about collapses. I was on the Condell road all those years ago when the car in front of me when into a sinkhole of sorts when the road collapsed early one morning.

Ha, should have seen traffic that day. :eek:

Vanquished

Beer Baron wrote: »

That's the thing. I was in a few basements on Thomas street since it has been redeveloped and they remain. I can never understand why William streets had to go.

Probably just a general lack of any real desire to retain those features.

Along with quite possibly an ignorance as regards their heritage value. Limerick has neither a city architect or archaeologist to advise on such matters.

bigpink

So what do people think of it so far?

source

bigpink wrote: »

So what do people think of it so far?

I think it makes an area of the city that has been neglected for decades, part of the city, it makes it inviting, it looks nice, there's less traffic so it's safer.

It's a massive improvement, I just can't wait for the boardwalk to be finished so I can incorporate it into my dog walk.

bigpink

Be great if they could have closed it all to traffic from the roundabout down maybe in time.More grass and trees in time also will be nice to see

Vanquished

The presence of a couple of car parks scuppers that idea for the moment. Harveys Quay multi storey would be the biggest impediment. The stretch from Lower Cecil Street to Lower Bedford Row will effectively become a pedestrian priority area now anyway once the current project is completed.

Incidentally the Limerick 2030 plan recommends closure of the Sarsfield bridge underpass to traffic and the removal of the roadway along Honans Quay. I'd certainly support such measures. That route is unnecessary. It's very lightly trafficked and there's a duplicate, higher capacity option less than 100 metres away!

The existing access route is a waste of space and a far more constructive use should be found. The predominance of galvanised steel crash barriers, ugly streetlights, bollards, traffic islands and other clutter gives rise to a pretty dismal environment that is totally out of character with the rest of the riverside.

That quayside area offers a fantastic perspective on the river and King's Island with a dramatic vista towards St. Mary's and the castle. An extension of the riverside walkway along with possibly a linear park and a plaza area should be provided here ideally in tandem with the redevelopment of the old Dunnes store which is supposedly earmarked for a "landmark" building in the 2030 plan.

power101

As the latest extended dealine ( end of October) comes and goes this project will be 4 months overdue for completion. From what I hear it'll be at least another 6 weeks until completion. A 7 month project that will have taken 14 months...

sleepyman

power101 wrote: »

As the latest extended dealine ( end of October) comes and goes this project will be 4 months overdue for completion. From what I hear it'll be at least another 6 weeks until completion. A 7 month project that will have taken 14 months...

I think even 6 weeks is highly optimistic if this includes Poor Mans Kilkee.I'd settle for the boardwalk & Clohesseys done.Are they still working on that?Is it near completion at this stage?

Cookiemunster

power101 wrote: »

As the latest extended dealine ( end of October) comes and goes this project will be 4 months overdue for completion. From what I hear it'll be at least another 6 weeks until completion. A 7 month project that will have taken 14 months...

While it is delayed a ridiculous amount of time, it's not 14 months. It won't have been closed a year until Nov 22nd.
The original closure was from 22nd Nov 12 until 21st Jan 13.

power101

Cookiemunster wrote: »

While it is delayed a ridiculous amount of time, it's not 14 months. It won't have been closed a year until Nov 22nd.
The original closure was from 22nd Nov 12 until 21st Jan 13.

Well it will have taken 13 months then not fourteen. Its closed over 11 months now.

Cityslicker1

sleepyman wrote: »

Is O Connell St next once they're finished the quays?

I hope so as the main street should really be a priority and it's really in bad need for remodeling. I just hope they don't go with the initially planned pedestrianisation of the street and instead put some nice paving like what they have on Thomas street,add street furniture and lots of trees and lighting. The constant flow of traffic up that street adds a vibrancy to the city centre that's needed and this will be lost if they close it off to traffic. It's too wide and long to be pedrianised anyway plus the fact that there's no shops can only be another reason why they shouldn't. Also, it would be great if they could put the bus stop back outside Brown Thomas instead of moving it down the side of Debenhams,there used to be a great buzz outside BT on the main street with people waiting,getting on and off buses, no point moving people off the main streets when complaining about a quiet city centre.

Poxyshamrock

Cityslicker1 wrote: »

Also, it would be great if they could put the bus stop back outside Brown Thomas instead of moving it down the side of Debenhams,there used to be a great buzz outside BT on the main street with people waiting,getting on and off buses, no point moving people off the main streets when complaining about a quiet city centre.

The bus stop being moved was apparently as a result of Brown Thomas kicking up a fuss. Same story goes for One Potato, Two Potato! :P

Cityslicker1

Poxyshamrock wrote: »

The bus stop being moved was apparently as a result of Brown Thomas kicking up a fuss. Same story goes for One Potato, Two Potato! :P

I thought they moved it in preparation for the pedestrianisation of O'Connell street and the oribital route around the city centre!

Cookiemunster

Cityslicker1 wrote: »

I hope so as the main street should really be a priority and it's really in bad need for remodeling. I just hope they don't go with the initially planned pedestrianisation of the street and instead put some nice paving like what they have on Thomas street,add street furniture and lots of trees and lighting. The constant flow of traffic up that street adds a vibrancy to the city centre that's needed and this will be lost if they close it off to traffic. It's too wide and long to be pedrianised anyway plus the fact that there's no shops can only be another reason why they shouldn't. Also, it would be great if they could put the bus stop back outside Brown Thomas instead of moving it down the side of Debenhams,there used to be a great buzz outside BT on the main street with people waiting,getting on and off buses, no point moving people off the main streets when complaining about a quiet city centre.

The original O'Connell St. / William St. plan from 2007 is here. That called for full pedestrianisation between William St and Roches St. plus footpath and streetscape upgrades as far as Mallow St. I don't know if the O'Connell St. plan has changed since, but William St. was done exactly as shown in the plan.

Although looking at the 2030 plan it seems that the pesestrianised area is to be around the Pennys / Cruises St./ Arthurs Quay area, with traffic still using O'Connell St. It's difficult to say for sure.

source

Cityslicker1 wrote: »

and instead put some nice paving like what they have on Thomas street,

I hope not, that's the worst surface in the city, it's a bloody death trap when wet, and it's bloody wet here a lot. Sure it looks nice but completely impractical for our climate.

steveon

source wrote: »

I hope not, that's the worst surface in the city, it's a bloody death trap when wet, and it's bloody wet here a lot. Sure it looks nice but completely impractical for our climate.

Totally agree like the look of it but those pavements are a nitemare, no longer use this street when on foot sick of near misses on these pavements and similar at pery sq and outside baker place....

Vanquished

From my own experiences it seems to be the darker paving trim on Thomas Street and Bedford Row that becomes pretty slippery in wet weather. Although I have noticed that it's more treacherous when wearing the likes of runners etc in comparison to formal shoes.

The cream paving used on those streets is French limestone as far as I know. Personally I think it's very vibrant and warm and certainly brightens up the city centre. It's also a fairly radical departure from the often rather dull, gloomy and uninspiring dark stone used on street revamps across Ireland.

O'Connell Street would be utterly transformed if repaved in the fashion that was envisaged back in 2007/2008. Although I would imagine high quality French limestone is quite expensive and perhaps the plan will have to be re-evaluated given these straightened times.

Also as mentioned previously funds seem to have been committed in next years budget for the design of the O'Connell Street remodelling project so this either signals a rethink or perhaps just the detailed finalisation of the existing plan.

Cityslicker1

source wrote: »

I hope not, that's the worst surface in the city, it's a bloody death trap when wet, and it's bloody wet here a lot. Sure it looks nice but completely impractical for our climate.

It might be slippy but it's the nicest street in the city and that's because of the paving as it really compliments the Georgian architecture very well. If they could use a paving on O'Connell street with a similar effect as Thomas street but non slip would be great. The new footpaths on William street are a bit disappointing, quite bland and shabby looking already so I hope they won't copy what they did on that street.

pigtown

I know we're getting off topic here but my favourite street is Little Catherine St. I like the way the paving has kind of worn away and is no longer smooth. I don't know if it was intentional or not but the effect is great.

Vanquished

pigtown wrote: »

I know we're getting off topic here but my favourite street is Little Catherine St. I like the way the paving has kind of worn away and is no longer smooth. I don't know if it was intentional or not but the effect is great.

Yeah they appear to have ruined the surface of the stone. A layer seems to have been worn off. More than likely a botched cleaning job! Nice to see expensive paving treated so professionally!:rolleyes:

Happily Lower Bedford Row hasn't suffered the same fate. It's paving was scrubbed recently and it looks great. As good as the day it was laid. Which must have been almost 10 years ago at this stage. A testament to the quality of the material!

Poxyshamrock

Vanquished wrote: »

Yeah they appear to have ruined the surface of the stone. A layer seems to have been worn off. More than likely a botched cleaning job! Nice to see expensive paving treated so professionally!:rolleyes:

Happily Lower Bedford Row hasn't suffered the same fate. It's paving was scrubbed recently and it looks great. As good as the day it was laid. Which must have been almost 10 years ago at this stage. A testament to the quality of the material!

They were at it with a blow torch for a week or two about a month ago.
I wondered what they were doing.

Vanquished

Possibly a misguided and poorly executed attempt to soften the surface and give it more traction!

Buckeye

Vanquished wrote: »

Possibly a misguided and poorly executed attempt to soften the surface and give it more traction!

I was told it was a treatment to rough up the surface because people in certain types of shoes were slipping, especially when the pavement was wet. I heard one person was injured fairly badly and is successfully suing the city, and so many people had already complained about how slippery the paving stones are along Catherine and Little Catherine and Thomas Streets.

Buckeye

Giant white steel boardwalk supports going into place on Harveys Quay, so it will almost surely be finished by next summer -

So -

What is our plan for a May Quays Grand opening?

sleepyman

Buckeye wrote: »

Giant white steel boardwalk supports going into place on Harveys Quay, so it will almost surely be finished by next summer -

So -

What is our plan for a May Quays Grand opening?

If the supports are in surely it will only take a week to put in the wood on the boardwalk?

Vanquished

Buckeye wrote: »

I was told it was a treatment to rough up the surface because people in certain types of shoes were slipping, especially when the pavement was wet. I heard one person was injured fairly badly and is successfully suing the city, and so many people had already complained about how slippery the paving stones are along Catherine and Little Catherine and Thomas Streets.

I do recall one particular business owner being quite vocal about the apparent dangerous nature of the paving. Although I think the complaint was as much in relation to cracked or damaged slabs as the slipperiness.

It was still a desperately ham-fisted and clumsy approach to take. Surely some form of coating or sealant could have been applied instead!

Hopefully Thomas Street and Bedford Row will be spared a similar butchering!