the beer revolu wrote: » Built with public money!
calnand wrote: » There's slipways at Blackrock village.
Mefistofelino wrote: » That might be the pontoon belonging to Lee Boat Club you're thinking of, up near PUC? .
Mefistofelino wrote: » Public slipway in Blackrock is essentially unusable other than close to high tide. With all the upgrade work they did a couple of years ago, they never actually dredged the harbour so for much of the day, the slipway is high and dry. There are slipways at Cork Boat Club but they are private.
Mefistofelino wrote: » That might be the pontoon belonging to Lee Boat Club you're thinking of, up near PUC? IIRC, one of the CBC slips was part funded, but that was specifically to facilitate boat-trailer access for the emergency services (river rescue, coastguard etc.). The other slip is there for a long while - its on the OSI Cassini map from the 1930s.
snotboogie wrote: » https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/Private-company-seeks-to-build-753-new-homes-on-Corks-northside-Fears-infrastructure-wont-be-able-to-cope-ac485620-17c7-444a-b30d-639bfce3d670-ds 753 homes for Ballyvolane, 10 year planning permission.... Set to be logged this week with ABP
Mefistofelino wrote: » I'd like to see the calculated current speeds for the proposed tidal barrier. I suspect that due to the fact that the barrier opening is far narrower than the natural channel, speeds will be elevated. This could make the barrier uncrossable much of the time for anything without a decent motor.
mrpdap wrote: » The dock at Lee RC was built a few years ago, as far a I know its public.
hans aus dtschl wrote: » It's all in the OPW report actually, in fairness to them. They talk about the angle and dimensions of the barrier and their impact on the channel at various tides for these very reasons. Makes for good reading.
mrpdap wrote: » Hi, Interesting, do you have a link to that section.
Mefistofelino wrote: » Link to report Section 9 is what you are looking for -it looks at impacts of gates at the various proposed locations
hans aus dtschl wrote: » ABP might approve it the way they approved the big development in Dunkettle/Glanmire: "approved as long as the Council - at some point in the distant vague future - upgrade the infrastructure to be able to cope with it". The Glanmire development is about to open and none of the roads even have plans to be upgraded yet! It's genius.
ShamoBuc wrote: » Genius is right. Build the houses, add God knows how much traffic onto the limited roads in Glanmire, then shut them for a time to improve the infrastructure thus creating absolute gridlock when they do actually do it. Jokeshop in essence. Proper cart before the horse stuff.
fonecrusher1 wrote: » Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't. In fairness if we had to wait until the road infrastructure was sorted there'd be no houses built at all ever. I agree with you in principle but we're in the middle of a government nurtured housing crisis so they have to be built.
snotboogie wrote: » According to skyscrappercity an 80 apartment development from OCP has started by Lancaster Quay, expect a crane by January. Seems like that randomer on twitter was right, lets hope he was also right about the Prism
nyck04 wrote: » What did Randomer tweet about the Prism?
kub wrote: » This now is Cork City Councils issue thanks to their colleagues in the County. When O'Flynn Construction went for planning, the City Council did object to this development due to the standard of roads down there, the lack of footpaths, cycle ways and public transport. A typical County Council approach to development, build away and let infastructure follow in some cases decades later.
hans aus dtschl wrote: » The infrastructure should be long finished by now and bedded in.
hans aus dtschl wrote: » Correct on all fronts. It'll happen again with Waterrock in Midleton: Council approved another big design focused around a train station and a sales pitch of "sustainable transport" and "no extra traffic", but they dropped the train station from the plans after the approval. Nobody follows up afterwards to check that the "infrastructure" that allowed approval for the development actually exists in practice. I do not understand how it's allowed. It's abuse of the planning system: the traffic models submitted and what gets built are totally different. Deliberately so.
questionmark? wrote: » They dropped the station at water rock? Where did you hear that out of interest?
hans aus dtschl wrote: » Good question: I can see that the Part 8 report of the Chief Executive still specifically includes the train station. I don't remember where I heard that they are moving ahead without it "for now". So perhaps wait until I provide proof before taking it as truth. I must say also, that I think the design with the train station included is pretty good.
omicron wrote: » Are there any plans for specific housing developments gone through for water rock or is it all still a broad area plan with no specifics or timeline?
hans aus dtschl wrote: » As far as I'm aware the only published docs are the LAP and the supporting infrastructure so far. The LAP section starts from page 57 here:http://corklocalareaplans.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/East-Cork-MD-LAP.pdf Specific housing types/densities on the site are detailed between there and the map of same, which is on page 75. Take it with a pinch of salt though because Council rarely adhere to these plans. The approved Part 8 plan and LAP disagree with each other and the Cork Cycle Network Plan (CCNP). For instance the LAP sends a cycle route through the middle of the housing development, the CCNP sends it on a direct E-W axis alongside the railway line, and the Council-approved Part 8 plan sends it along the main trunk road of the development (effectively reducing it to a "footpath with paint" and conferring no advantage on active travel users over motorists, in contravention of DMURS). So what I'm saying is that the LAP will give you an idea, but there's nothing specific published as far as I'm aware. In terms of timelines, they need the Part 8 infrastructure to sort out the groundwater issues and get machinery in, before they can start housing phase A. They were talking about Q4 2019 for the start of that. At a guess they started the designs in something like March.
omicron wrote: » Presumably like every other housing development in Midleton it's dependent on the expansion of the sewage treatment facilities/pumping?
Connections to Irish Water infrastructure or any alterations to Irish Water infrastructure will require agreement with Irish Water prior to commencement...[of the wastewater pumping station works]
