Limerick City Footbridge

mart 23

A tender has been issued by the council for the Limerick City Footbridge. It can be viewed at etenders.gov.ie. Sorry I cannot provide a link .

phill106

mart 23 wrote: »

A tender has been issued by the council for the Limerick City Footbridge. It can be viewed at etenders.gov.ie. Sorry I cannot provide a link .

98475 ED-FB-1 Limerick City Footbridge - Consultants - (Lot 1 - Project Manager/Employers Representative and Quantity Surveyor & Lot 2 - Single Point Design Team) 31/07/2015 08/09/2015 12:00 Restricted Procedure (OJEU) Limerick City and County Council Ireland


Cant login to it myself after this stage

sioda

Joke and massive waste of money that could be better spent.

phog

sioda wrote: »

Joke and massive waste of money that could be better spent.

I have reservations about it myself. I think it will destroy the view from Clancy Strand.

The money probably should have been invested in Nicholas St and add a boardwalk from Thomond Bridge along the castle to the City Hall gardens. Build a walk fom Arthur's Quay around Sarsfield House to rear of the Hunt Museum and open up Sylvester O'Halloran bridge.

tommy249

sioda wrote: »

Joke and massive waste of money that could be better spent.

I actually think, if done correctly, it could be good. I love the living bridge out in UL. Especially at night when lit up in all different colours

phog

tommy249 wrote: »

I actually think, if done correctly, it could be good. I love the living bridge out in UL. Especially at night when lit up in all different colours

Two completely different views though. The bridge will block out the view of that side of the city from Clancy Strand.

If it's lights we want for that area, light up the castle and the courthouse with better lighting.

I think the bridge is extravagant and may not achieve as much as is hoped. In fact it could lead tourists to turning their back on the Walls of Limerick, the gaol wall outside city hall and the Exchange Wall.

Edit to add image of proposed bridge, via Limerick Leader

theparish

So now we will have 2 pointless bridges within a 100 yards of each other.Please tell me I am mussing something.

kilburn

Ridiculous waste of money

bazz26

Could be better spent on a monorail. :pac:

kilburn

I was actually going to finish my comment with that line but then thought seeing as the last time someone said that here I said it was funny 5 years ago.........

Stellaluna

I can't see the wisdom in this project either - if they go ahead and knock Sarsfield house then surely they could capitalise on that and open up the route behind the Hunt Museum and make use of the existing metal bridge. The concepts are hardly sympathetic to the area/surroundings (in my mind they seem to be going for a similar aesthetic to the glass and steel structure attached to King John's Castle). Anyway, here's a link to an article on RIAI site with an aerial view and some explanation on why Failte Ireland love the idea so much. http://www.riai.ie/news/article/a_new_footbridge_and_riverway_for_limerick_city

zulutango

tommy249 wrote: »

I actually think, if done correctly, it could be good. I love the living bridge out in UL. Especially at night when lit up in all different colours

The Living Bridge is a beautiful construction, but the setting is not a medieval urban riverscape, so using it to justify the proposed bridge is really a nonsense. It's not really the bridge that's the problem, it's where it's located, plus the cost, plus the fact that it will serves almost no function whatsoever. It really is a disgrace that the Council are pushing forward with this.

pigtown

To me it's not even the location that's the problem, it's the design. I think a bridge that almost floats and rises and falls with the tides could be a real asset to the city, giving a unique view from the river. Like this boardwalk in Brisbane

It doesn't compromise the view of the museum, and provides a cool destination on the river.

Special Circumstances

zulutango wrote: »

The Living Bridge is a beautiful construction, but the setting is not a medieval urban riverscape, so using it to justify the proposed bridge is really a nonsense. It's not really the bridge that's the problem, it's where it's located, plus the cost, plus the fact that it will serves almost no function whatsoever. It really is a disgrace that the Council are pushing forward with this.

Yup.
I think anyone trying to upstage the castle would want to look long and hard at the city council building and sarsfields house and think... do we really need another juxtaposition in this area, or will it just look more and more crap as it ages?

Vanquished

This appears to be the most recent design proposal. The mind boggles as to how this could be deemed appropriate or necessary!

Shockingly misguided!

Stellaluna

Vanquished wrote: »

This appears to be the most recent design proposal. The mind boggles as to how this could be deemed appropriate or necessary!

Shockingly misguided!

Wow! Shocking is the word - that's on the 'Couldn't get it any more wrong if we tried' kinda level.

Special Circumstances

Stellaluna wrote: »

Wow! Shocking is the word - that's on the 'Couldn't get it any more wrong if we tried' kinda level.

They might be onto something. .. If you could hang or drape some material from it to obscure sarsfields house and the city council building it would be an improvement of sorts?

Stellaluna

Special Circumstances wrote: »

They might be onto something. .. If you could hang or drape some material from it to obscure sarsfields house and the city council building it would be an improvement of sorts?

Ah well they're meant to be demolishing Sarsfield house and extending Arthur's Quay park into that area. Revenue would move out of Sarsfield House into a purpose built place at the Opera centre site (and there's the catch). I don't know why they aren't moving forward with implementing the 2030 master plan for the city instead of throwing money at this distraction.

I really hope they move away from this 'white concrete/cable stayed/suspension bridge' design that has been repeated so many times - the latest concept looks like a version of the Peace bridge in Derry. If you're going for a folly, might as well do something more exciting/noteworthy.

Just to add insult to injury here: will they name it the 'John F Kennedy Bridge'? Or will we name it after the advertising sponsor we'll need to claw back some of the money? Sorry, that's not helpful but this footbridge really grinds my gears!

phog

What's the requirement for this bridge if Sarsfield House is being knocked. That's the main obstacle to pedestrians walking by the river towards city hall.

Complete waste of money.

Special Circumstances

Stellaluna wrote: »

I really hope they move away from this 'white concrete/cable stayed/suspension bridge' design that has been repeated so many times - the latest concept looks like a version of the Peace bridge in Derry. If you're going for a folly, might as well do something more exciting/noteworthy.

The picture linked to earlier really looks terrible to me, but I can see it being chosen automatically for no other reason than "shur every place has one a them bridges now" !!!

iguana

bazz26 wrote: »

Could be better spent on a monorail. :pac:

When are they next discussing this at a council meeting? Perhaps we could organise a flashmob to burst into a rousing chorus of 'monorail' when it's brought up?:cool:

Avatar MIA

First I heard of this, had to check it's not April 1st.

Are they really that bereft of ideas to do something with obviously available funds?

Clowns - but, we voted them in so ultimately it's our own fault.

zulutango

The campaign against this is getting going. It's hard to see it happening now given the very strong opposition to it locally.


http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/home/204700/Councillors-blast--18m-Limerick-project.html

Popoutman

Those impressions with the piers on and around the weir there, would make that section of river even more dangerous for anyone caught in the water flow there and upstream. The effect on the hydraulic / stopper wave could mean that the weir literally becomes a death trap to people entering the water upstream. Any winter water levels already make that bit of the river highly dangerous, and it would be poor thinking to make it even more so.

I would hope that the designs are properly lit as well, it's annoys me to see huge increases in light pollution from projects like this, when the lighting could be done in a much more environmentally friendly way with only correctly designed and implemented downlighting used. It's not hard to do that right, and still have something looking beautiful at night, while maintaining adequate public safety lighting. Bright searchlight types of illumination is certainly not the answer and makes it more unsafe - harder to see where you're going when you've got a bright light glaring directly into your vision, as anyone living near the Gaelic Grounds can attest to.

It'll be an interesting consultation process - I would hope that I and my fellow water users would be included in the process, to ensure that things that would otherwise get overlooked would be fixed, the same as was done for the Limerick Main Drainage scheme.

Red King

Anyone else concerned that a Bord Failte study of Limerick concluded that this bridge was the answer to tourism needs in the city?

A bridge that nobody wants or needs. Meanwhile Nicholas Street, which connects King Johns Castle to the city, continues its sad decline - a street that could badly do with an 18milluon investment and much more. It could be Limericks answer to shop street in Galway, instead it is a lifeless, drab, run down sorry excuse of a street leading to our main tourist attraction.

Well done Bord Failte, well done

sumtings

Red King wrote: »

Anyone else concerned that a Bord Failte study of Limerick concluded that this bridge was the answer to tourism needs in the city?

A bridge that nobody wants or needs. Meanwhile Nicholas Street, which connects King Johns Castle to the city, continues its sad decline - a street that could badly do with an 18milluon investment and much more. It could be Limericks answer to shop street in Galway, instead it is a lifeless, drab, run down sorry excuse of a street leading to our main tourist attraction.

Well done Bord Failte, well done

Thats something I have always thought re Nicolas Street and Galway, this bridge plan just seems to be an attempt to sever the whole area from 'tourist limerick'.

stefanovich

The location of this bridge is such that there will be little actual traffic. As bad as it sounds I reckon if it goes ahead it'll be the bridge of choice for people committing suicide.

johnnyryan89

stefanovich wrote: »

The location of this bridge is such that there will be little actual traffic. As bad as it sounds I reckon if it goes ahead it'll be the bridge of choice for people committing suicide.

I concur, hopefully they give a bit of funding towards Corbett if they do ahead with building a new bridge to help them up scale and take on more volunteers. But this money would be better served being spent on mental health facilities within the city, Limerick must have one of the highest rate of suicide in Ireland and building a new shiny bridge isn't gonna be a help to tackling this problem.

zulutango

Possibly the most ungoogleable name for a blog, but some good points made nonetheless ...

http://hlymrekr.com/2016/03/28/re-imagining-limerick-city/

sumtings

zulutango wrote: »

Possibly the most ungoogleable name for a blog, but some good points made nonetheless ...

http://hlymrekr.com/2016/03/28/re-imagining-limerick-city/

There is an image of Nicolas Street in tthe evening and its deserted, doesn't the castle close at 16:30 or do the hours change in the summer?

Red King

That blog post is spot on.

sumtings

sumtings wrote: »

There is an image of Nicolas Street in tthe evening and its deserted, doesn't the castle close at 16:30 or do the hours change in the summer?

Checked the website, last admision is 4pm all year round and agree the blog is spot on.

http://shannonheritage.com/KingJohnsCastle/

sioda

Website is wrong they are open until 7 or 8 during the summer season.

sumtings

And I learned something

Named after the city of Limerick, whose Irish name possibly means "bare spot". The Vikings called it Hlymrekr, which might be a transliteration of the Irish or could mean "mighty noise" from Old Norse hlym ("noise") and rekr ("mighty").

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_list_of_counties_of_Ireland

zulutango

I'd say it's more likely that Limerick and Hlymrekr are linked. Limerick wasn't an Irish settlement so it doesn't make much sense that it would have a Gaelic name.

Red King

Can we rename the place to Hlymrekr?

zulutango

Red King wrote: »

Can we rename the place to Hlymrekr?

I'm all for that.

jmch81

Red King wrote: »

Can we rename the place to Hlymrekr?

I'm calling on the City to be renamed after JFK, along with the renaming of Shannon bridge, Shannon Airport and any other items that may be lying around.


Would be good for the tourism.

Red King

The pro-bridge crowds latest argument seems to be "if we don't use this money it will not be allocated for other things."

The veil slips. Grab the money lads and fill your pockets, planning be damned.

zulutango

Red King wrote: »

The pro-bridge crowds latest argument seems to be "if we don't use this money it will not be allocated for other things."

The veil slips. Grab the money lads and fill your pockets, planning be damned.

The other argument seems to be "there's a lovely bridge in UL, so one would be lovely in the city too". These are the brains that are ruining running the city.

Vanquished

Red King wrote: »

The pro-bridge crowds latest argument seems to be "if we don't use this money it will not be allocated for other things."

The veil slips. Grab the money lads and fill your pockets, planning be damned.

Which is a pathetic and ludicrous argument when you consider that Bord Failte are responsible for a significant portion of the funding. It's not as if there's a lack of other worthy tourism related projects that the money could be used for. Rehabilitation and promotion of Nicholas Street, revamp of the Potato Market site etc.

zulutango wrote: »

The other argument seems to be "there's a lovely bridge in UL, so one would be lovely in the city too". These are the brains that are ruining running the city.

Yeah the happy clappers seem to be getting a bit disgruntled with the opposition to the plan. Using the bridge in a leafy setting like UL to justify a project in a sensitive, historic urban location is just embarrassing! Clutching at straws big time there!

Red King

Without naming individuals you don't have to dig far to see the usual cronies lining up to promote this - Limerick Post, Limerick Leader, Live 95fm, Limerick Marketing Company etc

And the people pushing this have frequently been employed by a number of the above.

I'm sick of the incestuous cronyism of the establishment in Limerick. It is high time that this cartel got challenged because as things stand, a very small number of people are dictating the conversation and direction of this city and from what I can see it is less to do with making the best decisions for the greater good and more to do with protecting the status quo and jobs for the boys.

Time to blow the lid off this racket.

jbkenn

Red King wrote: »

Without naming individuals you don't have to dig far to see the usual cronies lining up to promote this - Limerick Post, Limerick Leader, Live 95fm, Limerick Marketing Company etc.

Whatever about the rest, I don't think the blame for this lies with The Limerick Marketing Company aka (The rest home for ex Shannon Development bewildered), i think it has been quietly kicked to touch and the head numbnut has been transferred to 2 i/c Rent Allowance.
http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/business-news/109053/Reshuffle-of-senior-management-at-Limerick.html

stefanovich

Red King wrote: »

Time to blow the lid off this racket.

How?

Townie_P

I don't have a problem with the proposed footbridge at all. I think most people are over reacting to it based on the poor quality mock ups that have been circulated in the media. I don't have an issue with a modern bridge meeting the old architecture of the custom house and castle - modern architecture is all about marrying the old with new. Sarsfield House is being demolished once the Opera site is finished, Arthurs Quay Park is also getting a complete rejuvenation. That whole area is being opened up and will look completely different to what it is now. Rather than over reacting with hyperbole, I'd rather wait and see what the actual bridge is going to look like (because it hasn't even been designed yet) and how it will look in conjunction with the other changes on the waterfront. I see people calling the bridge a 'monstrosity' already, even though they haven't actually seen it and the thing hasn't even been designed :P

Also, having spoken to a fair few people on this, most business owners and stakeholders in the city are at least open to the idea of the bridge. There seems to be a 50-50 split when it comes to ordinary folk, some for it, some against. But like most things like this in life, it is those who are against it that tend to shout the loudest. However I do not believe that there is the level of opposition to the bridge that some would like to have you believe.

jbkenn

Townie_P wrote: »

Also, having spoken to a fair few people on this, most business owners and stakeholders in the city are at least open to the idea of the bridge.

Who are these stakeholders?

Townie_P

jbkenn wrote: »

Who are these stakeholders?

Business owners, property owners, hoteliers, estate agents etc etc.

Special Circumstances

Townie_P wrote: »

Business owners, property owners, hoteliers, estate agents etc etc.

You're a busy man! Very very busy if the opinions you've heard are just part of small talk.

jbkenn

Townie_P wrote: »

Business owners, property owners, hoteliers, estate agents etc etc.

I see, so stakeholders are what we used to call "vested interests".

Townie_P

Special Circumstances wrote: »

You're a busy man! Very very busy if the opinions you've heard are just part of small talk.

I am indeed a very busy man, and very well informed. I'm not going to reveal how I get my info or what I do. You can choose to believe what you like, or whether it's garnered from 'small talk' or not.

jbkenn wrote: »

I see, so stakeholders are what we used to call "vested interests".

A stakeholder is always a vested interest. So who else does a proposed city centre bridge project mainly affect aside from the previously mentioned stakeholders and the residents of the city/county?

zulutango

Can you name a single business person who is in favour of the bridge?