Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello All, This is just a friendly reminder to read the Forum Charter where you wish to post before posting in it. :)

Waterford developments

13468931

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,584 ✭✭✭ Deiseen


    Forget that, that's not how Max argues. He sarcastically tries to put you down if you state something that he doesn't agree with then gets all hot under the collar if you dare to stand up for yourself. The guy isn't able to debate properly.

    I don't think Max is wrong in what he is saying. Traffic in Waterford certainly has its pinch points but I've driven in many cities that literally get choked in traffic. You can't escape it no matter which way you move.

    Comparatively, Waterford is not bad at all and as Max says, this is backed up by the AA.

    Yes it sucks being in traffic, we all hate it but just because you are angry does not mean its worse than everywhere else. Fact.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ alta stare


    Deiseen wrote: »
    I don't think Max is wrong in what he is saying. Traffic in Waterford certainly has its pinch points but I've driven in many cities that literally get choked in traffic. You can't escape it no matter which way you move.

    Comparatively, Waterford is not bad at all and as Max says, this is backed up by the AA.

    Yes it sucks being in traffic, we all hate it but just because you are angry does not mean its worse than everywhere else. Fact.

    The thing is i never said traffic was worse here than anywhere else. I specifically mentioned traffic coming from Ferrybank is heavy in the mornings. Max suggested people should take the bypass just so they can go into town which is a ridiculous thing to say and he knows it hence why he left the conversation as he did.
    Any other person would admit they made a silly comment but no not our Max.

    Now if you, Max or anyone else thinks we dont need a second bridge then im sorry ye are wrong. Any progressive city has more than one bridge in its centre. Multiple times during the week i passed over the bridge and the quays were heavy with traffic and this was even at the times between 12 and 3. A second bridge would benefit this city no end.

    Cities and towns which have more than one vehicle bridge. Bypasses not counted.

    Cork 10
    Limerick 4
    Galway 3
    Dublin 10
    Drogheda 2
    Sligo 2
    Waterford 1

    So even towns like Drogheda and Sligo have more than we do. Madness.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,584 ✭✭✭ Deiseen


    alta stare wrote: »
    The thing is i never said traffic was worse here than anywhere else. I specifically mentioned traffic coming from Ferrybank is heavy in the mornings. Max suggested people should take the bypass just so they can go into town which is a ridiculous thing to say and he knows it hence why he left the conversation as he did.
    Any other person would admit they made a silly comment but no not our Max.

    Now if you, Max or anyone else thinks we dont need a second bridge then im sorry ye are wrong. Any progressive city has more than one bridge in its centre. Multiple times during the week i passed over the bridge and the quays were heavy with traffic and this was even at the times between 12 and 3. A second bridge would benefit this city no end.

    Cities and towns which have more than one vehicle bridge. Bypasses not counted.

    Cork 10
    Limerick 4
    Galway 3
    Dublin 10
    Drogheda 2
    Sligo 2
    Waterford 1

    So even towns like Drogheda and Sligo have more than we do. Madness.

    I agree we need another bridge and it looks like there is a drive beginning towards it. Whether this is at the Tower or out in Maypark (or both) we will have to see and hopefully it will be in the right place.

    I do agree on the width of the river being an issue. It is substantially wider than KK, Dublin and Cork.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ alta stare


    Deiseen wrote: »
    I agree we need another bridge and it looks like there is a drive beginning towards it. Whether this is at the Tower or out in Maypark (or both) we will have to see and hopefully it will be in the right place.

    I do agree on the width of the river being an issue. It is substantially wider than KK, Dublin and Cork.

    The width of the river is irrelevant. Bridges can span wider rivers so im sorry but that is not a valid reason to hinder a second bridge being built.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,511 ✭✭✭ Max Powers


    alta stare wrote: »
    The thing is i never said traffic was worse here than anywhere else. I specifically mentioned traffic coming from Ferrybank is heavy in the mornings. Max suggested people should take the bypass just so they can go into town which is a ridiculous thing to say and he knows it hence why he left the conversation as he did.
    Any other person would admit they made a silly comment but no not our Max.

    Now if you, Max or anyone else thinks we dont need a second bridge then im sorry ye are wrong. Any progressive city has more than one bridge in its centre. Multiple times during the week i passed over the bridge and the quays were heavy with traffic and this was even at the times between 12 and 3. A second bridge would benefit this city no end.

    Cities and towns which have more than one vehicle bridge. Bypasses not counted.

    Cork 10
    Limerick 4
    Galway 3
    Dublin 10
    Drogheda 2
    Sligo 2
    Waterford 1

    So even towns like Drogheda and Sligo have more than we do. Madness.

    Where did I say, people should take bypass to get to city centre from ferrybank.thats right I didnt, to suggest I did is desperate lying nonsense, even if your sore about the debate, you know well nobody would suggest using the second (suir) bridge from ferrybank to city centre, making up stuff is pathetic.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ alta stare


    Max Powers wrote: »
    Where did I say, people should take bypass to get to city centre from ferrybank.thats right I didnt, to suggest I did is desperate lying nonsense, even if your sore about the debate, you know well nobody would suggest using the second (suir) bridge from ferrybank to city centre, making up stuff is pathetic.

    Im not sore about anything. You suggested people should take the toll if going into town. You then ignore that fact and disappear off the thread for a few days. I think in fact it is you who is sore. You cannot accept when you are wrong or when you get called up on something you cannot back up.

    Read over what you posted previously Max and you will see im not making anything up.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ alta stare


    Max Powers wrote: »
    Where did I say, people should take bypass to get to city centre from ferrybank.thats right I didnt, to suggest I did is desperate lying nonsense, even if your sore about the debate, you know well nobody would suggest using the second (suir) bridge from ferrybank to city centre, making up stuff is pathetic.

    Yet people would sit in that traffic then pay to fly it thru our SECOND major bridge.

    The above is what you posted. That is you suggesting people should use the bypass rather than sit in traffic.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,395 ✭✭✭ Wanderer2010


    alta stare wrote: »
    Im not sore about anything. You suggested people should take the toll if going into town. You then ignore that fact and disappear off the thread for a few days. I think in fact it is you who is sore. You cannot accept when you are wrong or when you get called up on something you cannot back up.

    Read over what you posted previously Max and you will see im not making anything up.

    +1

    Ive had my share of disagreements with people here, including yourself Alta Stare but if im wrong or if I need to further consider a point of view, I will always come right out and say sorry or that's my fault etc and I need to consider another view. Max never, ever does this and has a touch of the bullying to his posts. Its the classic case of him not being able for people that stand up to him or challenge him. That's sad.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ alta stare


    +1

    Ive had my share of disagreements with people here, including yourself Alta Stare but if im wrong or if I need to further consider a point of view, I will always come right out and say sorry or that's my fault etc and I need to consider another view. Max never, ever does this and has a touch of the bullying to his posts. Its the classic case of him not being able for people that stand up to him or challenge him. That's sad.

    Absolutely. Yes myself and yourself had our disagreements alright and that's fine isnt that what Boards is about. I respect a poster like yourself as even though we had a tit for tat you are still humble enough to engage with me whether we are in agreement or not.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,511 ✭✭✭ Max Powers


    alta stare wrote: »
    Yet people would sit in that traffic then pay to fly it thru our SECOND major bridge.

    The above is what you posted. That is you suggesting people should use the bypass rather than sit in traffic.

    Exactly, people do, could and should use it rather than sit in traffic, nowhere did I say use second bridge if going to city centre from ferrybank. You assumed something that was not there and are repeating your false assumption.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ alta stare


    Max Powers wrote: »
    Exactly, people do, could and should use it rather than sit in traffic, nowhere did I say use second bridge if going to city centre from ferrybank. You assumed something that was not there and are repeating your false assumption.

    Jesus Christ you are unreal.

    You suggested people should use the bypass instead of sitting in traffic. Not everyone who is sitting in traffic would have the need to use the bypass in fact id bet the majority of cars there would be going nowhere near where the bypass would take them.

    I mean come on i even showed you what you said yet you are still denying it :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,511 ✭✭✭ Max Powers


    alta stare wrote: »
    Jesus Christ you are unreal.

    You suggested people should use the bypass instead of sitting in traffic. Not everyone who is sitting in traffic would have the need to use the bypass in fact id bet the majority of cars there would be going nowhere near where the bypass would take them.

    I mean come on i even showed you what you said yet you are still denying it :D

    So are we in agreement, I never wrote...use the bypass to get to city centre if you are in ferrybank. In an effort to come to some sort of peace treaty here....
    I totally agree with you, not everyone sitting in ferrybank traffic will be going near where suir bridge will take you i.e. if you are going to town, its your only route in reality. The suir bridge would be a good option in heavier traffic times if heading to cork road, IDA parks, anywhere around ORR, etc. how much of the traffic on rice bridge heading to likes of these places is due to people trying to avoid the toll or try a rat run thru city is frankly unknown but there is definitely some using rice bridge that could/should be on suir bridge. I won't say anymore on it alta, its Saturday night, no disrespect to you but I did not say what you said I did, I would appreciate if you stopped saying that. Im hopeful the pedestrian bridge will be a massive plus to ferrybank especially, you will be able to walk to city centre in no time, people coming further will be able to park on NQ and stroll over too. love to see a couple other bridges too, I think we agree, one out by ballygunner linked to airport/cork road would be fantastic.one by tower would free up quays completely too, might have knock on effects elsewhere but I wouldnt be objecting if they put one there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ alta stare


    Max Powers wrote: »
    So are we in agreement, I never wrote...use the bypass to get to city centre if you are in ferrybank. In an effort to come to some sort of peace treaty here....
    I totally agree with you, not everyone sitting in ferrybank traffic will be going near where suir bridge will take you i.e. if you are going to town, its your only route in reality. The suir bridge would be a good option in heavier traffic times if heading to cork road, IDA parks, anywhere around ORR, etc. how much of the traffic on rice bridge heading to likes of these places is due to people trying to avoid the toll or try a rat run thru city is frankly unknown but there is definitely some using rice bridge that could/should be on suir bridge. I won't say anymore on it alta, its Saturday night, no disrespect to you but I did not say what you said I did, I would appreciate if you stopped saying that. Im hopeful the pedestrian bridge will be a massive plus to ferrybank especially, you will be able to walk to city centre in no time, people coming further will be able to park on NQ and stroll over too. love to see a couple other bridges too, I think we agree, one out by ballygunner linked to airport/cork road would be fantastic.one by tower would free up quays completely too, might have knock on effects elsewhere but I wouldnt be objecting if they put one there.

    I never said you wrote i said you suggested it. Seriously have you not read anything posted at all.

    The new footbridge will do very little for traffic in the City. How many times have you seen people lob their cars right next to a shop on the quays because they are too lazy to park across the road in an actual car park....some people are lazy gits and that will never change.

    A new vehicular bridge is a no brainer and it should be one of a number of priority projects done for the genuine progression of our City.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,584 ✭✭✭ Deiseen


    alta stare wrote: »
    I never said you wrote i said you suggested it. Seriously have you not read anything posted at all.

    The new footbridge will do very little for traffic in the City. How many times have you seen people lob their cars right next to a shop on the quays because they are too lazy to park across the road in an actual car park....some people are lazy gits and that will never change.

    A new vehicular bridge is a no brainer and it should be one of a number of priority projects done for the genuine progression of our City.

    Distances in Waterford will seem a lot smaller once the city is expanded. A ten minute walk for people in other cities is nothing but in Waterford, people make out like its a lifetime. Increase in scale will hopefully help with this. Also you'd be surprised how far people will go to save a few cents. Clever pricing here could wipe out the south quay carparks.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,619 ✭✭✭ erica74


    Wow.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ alta stare


    Deiseen wrote: »
    Distances in Waterford will seem a lot smaller once the city is expanded. A ten minute walk for people in other cities is nothing but in Waterford, people make out like its a lifetime. Increase in scale will hopefully help with this. Also you'd be surprised how far people will go to save a few cents. Clever pricing here could wipe out the south quay carparks.

    Imagine the town with the NQs, footbridge, second vehicle bridge and a lovely Boardwalk on the quays......it would be amazing. I wonder then what we would argue over on here :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,584 ✭✭✭ Deiseen


    alta stare wrote: »
    Imagine the town with the NQs, footbridge, second vehicle bridge and a lovely Boardwalk on the quays......it would be amazing. I wonder then what we would argue over on here :D

    A third vehicle bridge in town probably!


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ alta stare


    Deiseen wrote: »
    A third vehicle bridge in town probably!

    Ill settle for a second one for the time being. :D a third would be great.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,584 ✭✭✭ Deiseen


    alta stare wrote: »
    Ill settle for a second one for the time being. :D a third would be great.

    The thing is, the North Quays justifies a second bridge. Without it, we are 20 years from it. I imagine plans will develop quickly during construction of the NQ and will start soon after it is finished. Same as justification for Uni, Hospital, Airport etc etc


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭ alta stare


    Deiseen wrote: »
    The thing is, the North Quays justifies a second bridge. Without it, we are 20 years from it. I imagine plans will develop quickly during construction of the NQ and will start soon after it is finished. Same as justification for Uni, Hospital, Airport etc etc

    I agree. Hopefully the city kicks on.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3 Bictables


    Galway City has 4 bridges (Quincentennial, Salmon Weir, Wolfe Tone and O'Brien's) over the river Corrib.


  • Registered Users Posts: 597 ✭✭✭ azimuth17


    Waterford has five bridges, Lombard Street, Hardy's Bridge, John's Bridge, Wyse Bridge, and Inner Ring Bridge plus three pedestrian bridges (Scott's Quay, Park Bridge, Gas House bridge) over St John's River which is not far from the same width as the Corrib, Bridging the very deep river Suir at Waterford is a slightly bigger proposition than bridging the Corrib, Lee or Liffey in Galway Cork or Dublin respectively.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,412 ✭✭✭ Road-Hog


    azimuth17 wrote: »
    Waterford has five bridges, Lombard Street, Hardy's Bridge, John's Bridge, Wyse Bridge, and Inner Ring Bridge plus three pedestrian bridges (Scott's Quay, Park Bridge, Gas House bridge) over St John's River which is not far from the same width as the Corrib, Bridging the very deep river Suir at Waterford is a slightly bigger proposition than bridging the Corrib, Lee or Liffey in Galway Cork or Dublin respectively.

    Major difference between Waterford and the multiple bridges in other cities is the length from one bank to the other plus the topography.......average width of suir closet to city center is 220m and there is only say a 2km length of river where the topography will allow an at grade bridge........the Liffey is probably only 50/50 m in width all the way from its mouth up stream for at ear 4/5 miles. The lee has a similar width not sure about the corrib in Galway but it doesn’t appear that wide. The Shannon in limerick is wide but again not 200m plus like the suir. Limerick has two bridges and a tunnel........the economics and relatively low population when compared to other large urban areas in city means Waterford will be waiting a long time for a third vehicular bridge unfortunately


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 587 ✭✭✭ Dum_Dum


    Road-Hog wrote: »
    Major difference between Waterford and the multiple bridges in other cities is the length from one bank to the other plus the topography.......average width of suir closet to city center is 220m and there is only say a 2km length of river where the topography will allow an at grade bridge........the Liffey is probably only 50/50 m in width all the way from its mouth up stream for at ear 4/5 miles. The lee has a similar width not sure about the corrib in Galway but it doesn’t appear that wide. The Shannon in limerick is wide but again not 200m plus like the suir. Limerick has two bridges and a tunnel........the economics and relatively low population when compared to other large urban areas in city means Waterford will be waiting a long time for a third vehicular bridge unfortunately


    If the Suir is so wide and deep in the City then where's all the shipping gone?

    Answer: Kilkenny - https://www.investkilkenny.ie/belview-port/



    Heaving shipping and bridging points conflict with each other - yet Waterford ends up with neither.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,412 ✭✭✭ Road-Hog


    Dum_Dum wrote: »
    If the Suir is so wide and deep in the City then where's all the shipping gone?

    Answer: Kilkenny - https://www.investkilkenny.ie/belview-port/



    Heaving shipping and bridging points conflict with each other - yet Waterford ends up with neither.

    Who wants freight shipping and associated artic traffic coming into city center /quays.......???


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 587 ✭✭✭ Dum_Dum


    Road-Hog wrote: »
    Who wants freight shipping and associated artic traffic coming into city center /quays.......???


    No-one. So now a bridge can be built.

    Plenty of opportunities emerged when the Port was moved downstream. But none of them developed. Another example is the Quays used as a massive car park - what a waste. Potential not reached.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,300 ✭✭✭ Luckycharms_74


    robtri wrote: »
    see the development application for out the Dunmore road way got turned down partly because the density was too high?????

    crazy that a city would make that decision

    As posted above city council have no say in that. The new government "fast track" a couple of years ago for housing developments above 100 units goes straight to An Bord Pleanala.

    http://rebuildingireland.ie/news/new-regulations-to-fast-track-large-scale-housing-developments/


    Here is another proposed development in Ballygunner near the church. It has been received strong opposition and lots of submissions gone in to ABP to object.

    Until the infrastructure is put in by new ring road and more schools etc, I can't see it ever getting the go ahead.



    https://www.knockboy.ie/

    1pcmwp3.jpg

    W31dmCC.jpg
    wgnjJYQ.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 40,086 ✭✭✭✭ Harry Palmr


    It'll be very visible as it will climb a slope and then "top" it off, as you say infrastructure is non existent beyond Gaelscoil Port Lairge and the Ballygunner junior school. It's the usual threat of a hodge-podge collection of elements and no social context.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,032 ✭✭✭ hardybuck


    The Dunmore Road is a prime example of inappropriate development and hopefully the mistakes there can be avoided in the future.

    Probably a decade of building where the Council must have taken those developer's levies and spent them somewhere else, because the lack of infrastructure is appalling, even if some important improvements like a ring road and a play area have been added.

    When Grange Cove was built you knew they really didn't care, as they allowed the only proper green area and playing pitches for an area with a population of maybe 10-12k to be used to build yet more houses on a road that was choked with congestion.

    There is more than enough zoned land within the ring roads for housing to be built for at least the next ten years.

    Regarding future development (i.e. ten years from now) I would be looking for a bridge at Belview Port, coming across around Faithlegg or Minaun. This could link up with the existing crossing that's there at the Great Island Power Station, and provide scope for pushing the existing ring road out past Williamstown and Killure.

    A further vehicular bridge crossing will just get traffic stuck into Parnell St and the Quays quicker and be counterproductive. If traffic is ever allowed to cross at the NQ's bridge it should be public transport vehicles only.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,300 ✭✭✭ Luckycharms_74


    It'll be very visible as it will climb a slope and then "top" it off, as you say infrastructure is non existent beyond Gaelscoil Port Lairge and the Ballygunner junior school. It's the usual threat of a hodge-podge collection of elements and no social context.

    Here is the "Visual Impact Assessment" from the website.

    https://www.knockboy.ie/sites/default/files/docs/VISUAL%20IMPACT%20ASSESSMENT.pdf


Advertisement