Ireland 2040 plan "will kill rural Ireland"

bk wrote: »

Huh?! People in rural Ireland travel significantly further everyday then those living in urban Ireland and I can pull up the CEO stats if you need proof.

Lots of cars have auto shutoff systems or are hybrids, so don't pollute when stuck in traffic.

They travel further at a quicker pace, not crawling along in traffic.

And auto shutoff is only a new thing on newer cars and hybrids a fair few will argue are more a drain on the environment through their manufacturer.

bk wrote: »

I actually live outside the canals and don't own a car. I mostly walk, cycle, the odd bus and very odd taxi. Not unusual at all for people in my neighbourhood. Pretty much anywhere inside the M50 and you don't need a car at all.

BTW interestingly rural Ireland has significantly worse air quality then urban Ireland, happy to pull up the stats for you if you need.

So all those dirty old buses, all those cars crawling along in traffic are not contributing pollution to the environment in the cities ?

BTW I find it a bit incongruous that you are a mod of the commuting and transport forum when you don't commute to work or don't it appears use public transport.
Hell you are like that guy in charge of Dublin traffic system that just uses a bike. :rolleyes:

Oh and just because you are relatively near work that you can walk or cycle try living in say Stillorgan and working in Santry, Parkwest or Citywest.

John_Rambo wrote: »

99% of Nox’s posts are irrelevant on this thread, in fact most seem to be boastful posts about his imaginary ostentatious house, the rest of his posts seem to be sneering and looking down at people the dwell in more modest homes that actually exist.

Either way, he's to inherit the family farm in Galway, so he’s a food producer with a connection to the land and therefore needs and should live rural.

Ahh for fecks sake, why didn't you say he was from Galway.

pilly wrote: »

I don't see anyone suggesting that people shouldn't live rurally.

They're suggesting that one off houses scattered all over the country doesn't work, which it doesn't. Simple.

What is the difference between a one off house a km from a small village and a house in a small village ?
There will not be a Garda station, a post office, a bank, a hospital, a supermarket, no secondary school, no real bus service most likely.

Either way the people living in that small village are going to have to use cars to get anywhere like shopping, schools, work, etc.

People here just play it that they are very anti one off house when really if they are look at their arguments about travel, not enough sustainable numbers for services then they are anti anything not a big town or city.

Or else maybe they just don't like one off houses aesthetically ruining their visit to the countryside?

pilly wrote: »

It's a very good point, how many houses does it take to run a farm?

You try living away from a dairy farm or a sheep farm when calving and lambing is on.
Then come back to us and tell us how achievable it is.

Or do you suggest that the ones inheriting the farm should just turf out the parents or just share with them ?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This from Dev Jr.

http://connachttribune.ie/planning-framework-will-squeeze-life-rural-ireland-487/

Makes me think there is going to be something along the lines of restrictions on how far one off builds can be done outside of towns/villages.

What baffles me though, is this type of restriction would serve to grow rural towns and villages, not wipe them out

The idea is that if developers and individuals cannot build one off housing there will be greater demand in towns, which will lead to more housing in towns. The Galway light rail debate this week kind of highlights this, Galway doesn't have the density for light rail but is blighted by traffic. If there was greater density in Galway City there could be a light rail solution. Instead you have thousands commuting from outside the city and no solution available other than more raods.

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Lots of differences. They'll use the car less for one as they can just walk to the local shop, schools, work etc.

I know a school based in a village and a lot of the villagers actually drive their kids to it.

And the small villages will not have the numbers for a secondary school so transport.
Most of the shopping will be done in the nearest Lidl, Aldi, Tesco or Dunnes in the nearest large town so still driving.

Walk to work ????
So is every village going to get a factory. :eek:
Better tell that poster from earlier.

Seriously I don't know where some of you guys live or are from, but about the only thing people will walk to is the local pub.
And yes maybe the national school.

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Broadband is a lot easier and cheaper to provide to people living in a village or town than it is to people living along multiple different roads in one off houses leading into and out of said town or village. Electricity and water would probably be cheaper and easier to provide as well.

Granted wired broadband would be easier to supply.
And yes there would be less need for electricity lines, but then again lines will have to be maintained to give power to farms, etc.
Or will they be told they shouldn't have power ?

Also has anyone ever thought that by moving everyone into a village you are then pushing the cost of water and sewage provision onto the local council (the state, the taxpayers) and not the individual as is with one off housing ?

No for true cost benefits that some people want the only solution is everyone moves to a city, preferably the mecca of Ireland Dublin's inner city.

pilly wrote: »

Population 350, if that's not small I don't know what is.

How many pubs ?

BTW to support a doctor and butcher then you must have a sizable population in the village's hinterland.

Luka Lemon Town wrote: »

Some of the arguments make no sense though, for example it just as easy for an ambulance to drive out from a city hospital to a one of house as it is to a town. Espeically now with eircodes it makes everyhouse very easy to find.

You are really failing to grasp what we are on about here in totality. I mean you're just not getting it.

pilly wrote: »

Not when their choice costs others no.

But your choice is also costing others as you live in a small village.
Taking the economies of scale, if you moved to an even bigger town then you probably would save the state money.

If you take this to it's logical conclusion then everyone should live in a city and in the heart of that city.

Also if you start looking at the cost of everything and the value of nothing, you will soon come to a conclusion that no money should be spent in areas like Jobstown or Southill, that no money should be spent on promoting Irish language TV, no money should be spent on RTE's national symphony orchestra, etc, etc.

Where do you stop?
Do you stop aiding the old, the sick, the infirmed because after all they are economically unviable and a drain on the state, i.e the ones contributing ?

And make no mistake there are people with some of those views.
And I bet you have some of them right here posting.

I live in the country.
I don't expect the same services as someone living in the heart of a town or city.
I don't expect street lighting, footpaths, or indeed the same broadband service that those in a city can get.
I think it is ridiculous to expect fibre to the home.

I expect that if I was in an accident or got ill that it would take time to get an ambulance to me, but I don't think I should have to wait hours because the nearest big hospital have ambulances tied up because they haven't the beds for the population of the area they serve or because they haven't enough ambulances for the population be they in towns or rural.

BTW a big problem with our hospitals isn't down to geographical hinterlands, but the fact that they have less beds now than they did when we had half the population.

I do expect some form of adequate policing and get this the criminal that breaks into my property or attacks me as sure as sh** will break into a property or attack a person in a town some day as well.
Criminals tend to be equal opportunities individuals when it suits.

I expect the local road to be in some form of decent repair and so probably do the townies and city types that use it of a weekend.

I pay for more fuel because I drive more, I probably pay for more car maintenance and thus help keep my mechanic in employment and add to his tax returns.

Yes I am connected to a disparate electricity network, but those lines would have to be left in place to service farms in the area.

I pay for my own water and sewage and it is in my own damn interest not to have shyte getting into local water sources, despite what some numpties may think of rural dwellers.

pilly wrote: »

That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. The more people living close to the village or town is what will SAVE rural Ireland. Create a vibrancy in your own village.

This is the point most of us are trying to make but certain posters are ignoring sense.

While we're talking about bang for buck. Got a newsletter in the door from a local councillor.
It cost €125k to resurface not even 1km of road that runs through the part of Dublin I'm from.

That is insane. No one thinks about the cost of road maintenance in this country. Especially our councils. I reckon it's because maintenance money comes from central government.

Honestly, and I say this as a citizen of this country, not a Dub, we should focus on promoting living closer together. It's possible to provide a nice living environment and good homes (not necessarily houses) while having people live densely enough for public transport too be viable.

If we can change mindsets and get more people out of their cars we can invest the money in other things.

At the moment instead we have massive amounts of public money being used on roads and massive amounts of private money on cars and fuel. Imagine if that €60 a week you spend on diesel was spent locally instead. How much more prosperous would we be!

And yes, Dublin planners have a lot to answer for. And we should be doing better! But one off housing is terrible financially and environmentally.

The answer isn't simple, and it's emotive for a lot of people, but we need to talk rationally about what sort of society we want and how it should be financed.



Personally, I feel that if councils had to raise (and could raise) their own taxes and had to pay for services out of them, then we'd already have seen an end to one off houses, because unless the occupiers pay for everything, they wouldn't be viable to service.
I'm not advocating a change to the funding model, I'm just using it to make a point.

NIMAN wrote: »

Looking forward to this plan being released to see how the NW fares!

It appears you could draw a line across the country from Dublin, and everything above that is forgotten.

Makes sense given that the 26 counties' main urban centres are all below that line. The "northwest" argument is over-done, it's strikes me as a little arbitrary. If Galway was 100km further north, it'd get the same funding. If Sligo was 100km further south, it'd get the same funding.