cgcsb wrote: » In fairness Cork County City Council's redesign of the road is a shambles, regardless of the resident's gardens,
hans aus dtschl wrote: » Wilton Road's not really a suburb: exactly as you say it's right between all these major trip generators. At a guess it'd be the prime place to start with a congestion charge. It's on possibly the best bus route in the country. And most people from outside the city do not use Wilton Road to access CUH. Most of them do not use Wilton Road to access UCC or CIT either. It's primarily used for people to get to the city centre from the west, and for people to cross the city between North and South.
[Deleted User] wrote: » I've got an answer to all this anyway :D Build the bloody North Ring Road. Most of that traffic is stuck because of the traffic backlog going towards Wellington bridge, going up towards Sunday's Well.
Flesh Gorden wrote: » to admit you don't want to lose your parking income for the greater good.
RINO87 wrote: » From the very small sample of pictures it looks to be retired folk getting their grandkids to do the protesting for them.....devaluing their own inheritance!!
namloc1980 wrote: » Just read one of the signs being held up by one of the children. "Down with the threats of the NTA, our community killed like Du Plantier". What kind of a shower are they? So disrespectful. I hope they bulldoze all the gardens out there.
fonecrusher1 wrote: » Surely being told your garden is going to be affected automatically makes it a CPO. I'm pretty sure any affected NIMBYs get a nice chunk of dough for their troubles. I'm open to correction on that.
Deleted User wrote: » Not necessarily to be honest. At my age I can happily move and not have it an issue, as long as my move to a similar property does not leave me out of pocket. That's why there should be a full CPO option if they are impacting drastically. Were I in my 60's and my entire life worth of family memories? I'd be a curmudgeon to be bloody honest.
hans aus dtschl wrote: » I'd agree. North Ring Road + Congestion Charge should drop traffic on Wilton Road dramatically.
fonecrusher1 wrote: » Would getting a nice tax free lump of compensation money help ease the pain?
Deleted User wrote: » If someone came to me and said "I'm taking several metres of your garden, and replacing it with a multi lane road now up to your window" I can tell you that my response would not be polite.
hans aus dtschl wrote: » Yeah traffic is closer, but it's primarily (only?) bicycles. The bus (every 15 mins) will be effectively in the same place it is now. And it's specifically NOT HGV's, or heavy traffic.
Deleted User wrote: » I've got an answer to all this anyway :D Build the bloody North Ring Road. Most of that traffic is stuck because of the traffic backlog going towards Wellington bridge, going up towards Sunday's Well.
Deleted User wrote: » It's still bringing traffic closer no matter which way it's swung. I'd have little/no sympathy if there was a CPO option on the entire property TBH
Deleted User wrote: » How do you congestion charge a suburb next to the main hospital in the south of the country though and right between two huge colleges and the FAS training school?
hans aus dtschl wrote: » Did you see the plan? It's to put in cycle lanes on the outside and then bus lanes. The heavy traffic will be in the same place it is now. And many of the "gardens" are used to park cars. And the residents would also be on possibly the best bus route in the city, all subsidised by the city. I agree that they've reason to be aggrieved BTW, just that the picture you paint isn't 100% accurate.
hans aus dtschl wrote: » From reading the background documents of CMATS ("Supporting Measures") it looks like a congestion charge should be brought in ASAP.
Deleted User wrote: » Is anyone surprised by people fighting to protect their gardens? And it is not just their garden, they will go from having heavy traffic 15-20M away to pretty much outside their windows. That makes a huge difference If someone came to me and said "I'm taking several metres of your garden, and replacing it with a multi lane road now up to your window" I can tell you that my response would not be polite. So while I fully agree that the widening has to happen, I would be less than truthful if I said that I don't totally understand their objections. Do we need the road widened, as a city? Yes Does that mean that those impacted are being needlessly stubborn? Not really As much as we give out about the NIMBY activist it's so much easier for those of us not impacted to roll our eyes and complain about them. Are we, say, a GIIBY (Grand If It's Your Backyard)?
Rhys Essien wrote: » JCD clearly stated that the Sextant tower plan was due to companies giving out about their staff finding it hard to find accommodation. IMO he was referring particularly to Apple and the large number of young foreign staff. In this case why would schools in the area matter. This type of accommodation will never really be for a family with kids.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » Ballymun is what not to do all right, not only from design, but everything. but its a bit different from high density beside existing services. Massive greenfield development of 1000s units, but no services (shops etc.) when built, a couple KM outside city. Miles from anything. As tenants couldnt buy flats when circumstances improved, they moved out, leaving just social dependants, and the resulting antisocial problems
[Deleted User] wrote: » Ballymun?