nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Proposed Eastern Bridge at the Riverside (mod warning, #137)

redarmyblues

The planning hearing on this project has reopened today in the Clarion. The residents group in the area won a judical review to have the process reopened to examine the implications of noise generated by the road on the local environment.

I think it is obvious the bridge design is ludicrous, the plan for the southern approach ridiculous, the effect on the community disastrous, that if this project is built it will be an act of unforgivable vandalism to the the most attractive area in Sligo by a self serving, unelected coterie of technocrats. It is ironic that these sensitive souls who are unable to attend Corpo meetings lest they face criticism form Councillors are themselves so insensitive to other people and the environment

If there must be an eastern river crossing I believe that this area of town is so very much worth preserving that it ought to take the form of a tunnel. Until that happens reopen O Connell St

If you ask yourself why this bridge at this location, then examine the plans, I think the roundabout without exits on the northern side goes a long way to answering that question.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

tuppence

I know I wont be popular for saying this with you (and I need to wear a bullet proof vest!) but I think that the bridge and cranmore regeneration should be seen as two separate things. The people of Cranmore deserve that money be put aside to make their place a better place to live in for all, They shouldnt have been pushed into this business about lobbying for a bridge. Its unfair pitching two communities against each other. And have you walked down the area recently. Any town, any county for that matter would be proud to have such a beautiful, breathtaking natural resource for its citizens. And what do we want to do, build a bridge on it.....

And well we all know about the ethos of development and the government and where that type of shortsighted thinking from our governing heads has led in the past. The policy of focusing on the construction industry for jobs has left alot of people now unskilled, and left too many eyesores that are damaging our environment and causing immeasurable effects to the likes of tourism which was consistently one of our best and our most sustainable (dare I say it economic) selling points. And as for any advice that Cohen et al may have, I find this pressure coming from politicians on high and the focus of aspects of the local media quite a worry really, its almost feels like bullying

saywhatyousee

tuppence wrote: »

I know I wont be popular for saying this with you (and I need to wear a bullet proof vest!) but I think that the bridge and cranmore regeneration should be seen as two separate things. The people of Cranmore deserve that money be put aside to make their place a better place to live in for all, They shouldnt have been pushed into this business about lobbying for a bridge. Its unfair pitching two communities against each other. And have you walked down the area recently. Any town, any county for that matter would be proud to have such a beautiful, breathtaking natural resource for its citizens. And what do we want to do, build a bridge on it.....

And well we all know about the ethos of development and the government and where that type of shortsighted thinking from our governing heads has led in the past. The policy of focusing on the construction industry for jobs has left alot of people now unskilled, and left too many eyesores that are damaging our environment and causing immeasurable effects to the likes of tourism which was consistently one of our best and our most sustainable (dare I say it economic) selling points. And as for any advice that Cohen et al may have, I find this pressure coming from politicians on high and the focus of aspects of the local media quite a worry really, its almost feels like bullying

i sort of agree with you
sligo needs a proper by-pass
but where do you build it atlantic ocean one side, lough gill the other?

tuppence

saywhatyousee wrote: »

i sort of agree with you
sligo needs a proper by-pass
but where do you build it atlantic ocean one side, lough gill the other?

Okay I'l take a deep breath here........Do we? Weve done alright.? I dont see the huge imperative to have a bypass, if its suppose to be an argument to transport people faster ie for the extra time saved? And wheres the huge amt of goods that are currently been impeded? Has it helped Longford or Athlone or the likes of them now in their development? I wouldnt mind what the government says, a group that dug up half the country for rds and bypasses for the sake of "progress" but of course we now know some of it was building for the sake of it.

Is there really a traffic problem thats worth what imo would be huge environmental damage. And sometimes surely it is also about esthetics, its about having green areas to walk, somewhere to be proud of that doesnt have the steel and concrete structures of urban living on top on us.
Its also about catering for more than our car owners. In a time of recession perhaps its about getting back to basics. We arent a city (I know thats was anorther debate!) cant we just appreciate what we have and we do have it. As you said the atlantic ocean one side and Lough gill the other!

We are blessed and for once lets preserve it rather than getting a crane on top of it for what we are being told is good for us.

saywhatyousee

i agree i dont think building a bridge over lough gill is a wise choice
perhaps the widening of hughes bridge and then building dual carraige way
to the pitch and putt and make the mall the main access way to town

Buford T Justice

What people don't seem to realise is that without the eastern link bridge, the regeneration of cranmore won't go ahead at all, that's why the community have been pushed into lobbying for the bridge.

Because those knobs decided to remove the bridge from the plan even though no one wanted it moved, every one else now has to suffer for it. This from the people that thought it was a good idea to re open o connel street to traffic, and my doesn't it look pretty now....... Wankers

Was anyone at the meeting?

il gatto

If it's a shabby looking plan like Hughe's Bridge, so short it's a causeway on the northern side, then no, it shouldn't be built. On the other hand something like the Boyne bridge might look nice. It would be spectacular to drive over and may encourage tourism when people see the scenery. It would relieve alot of the unwanted traffic from the middle of the town and enable the pedestrianising of more streets. It would create jobs in the short term and maybe in the long term too.
I'm all for preserving our landscape but a by-pass must happen at some stage, most probably to the east of the town. We should avail of the chance to use the funding now while the local economy is in a state of depression. Only IMO of course.

tedshredsonfire

I was at the meeting last night and yeah it got a bit heated but the usual trot was spewd out from borough councillors only 3 of whom soke out but there was 6 of them present. their line was the decoupling of cranmore regeneration from the eastern bridge so go ahead with cranmore but put the bridge in at a later date. Gov has said no either do it all or don't do it. To my mind this would be liek building hughes bridge with no dual carridge way to it just a single road on and off the bridge madness obviously.
It was also said that the councillors caused the "split" when they all signed a declaration to residents of martin savage tce that the bridge would not go ahead where it is despite them having it in the plans for sligo since 1973 before I was born. There was a good turnout at the meeting defo over a hundred but there was more outside the room so not sure on figures.

dardevle

....

did anyone present at last nights meeting offer an explanation as to why the cranmore area would only be deemed worthy of regeneration only when this bridge goes back on the plans??? why are they linked? everyone knows that the area needs regeneration, and that the residents deserve it but i think that it is the lowest of politics, to pitch neighbours and in some cases families against one another, lets face it - what it would come down to is the demise of one neighbourhood to regenerate another

also, if both of these projects are so inextricably linked - why has a scale model of the regeneration area been made available for public viewing ---but no model of the bridge ever produced??

...

tedshredsonfire

tedshredsonfire wrote: »

Gov has said no either do it all or don't do it. To my mind this would be like building hughes bridge with no dual carridge way to it just a single road on and off the bridge madness obviously.

as above

redarmyblues

the eastern bridge does not form part of a bypass it is an inter urban route and supposed to connect communities north and south of
The river. The western bypass is not intended to cross the atlantic merely the estuary at a point below the deepwater where you can cross whit your trousers rolled up a low tide.
Of course there is no money for either project and it is a cynical ploy by ff to deflect blame on to local reps and anyone who thinks otherwise is the arrantest fool.

il gatto

redarmyblues wrote: »

the eastern bridge does not form part of a bypass it is an inter urban route and supposed to connect communities north and south of
The river. The western bypass is not intended to cross the atlantic merely the estuary at a point below the deepwater where you can cross whit your trousers rolled up a low tide.
Of course there is no money for either project and it is a cynical ploy by ff to deflect blame on to local reps and anyone who thinks otherwise is the arrantest fool.

And will that signal the end of our much neglected port? It's been so poorly run that it's a shadow of what it was but I think it'd be a sad day when the last ship sails into Sligo. I can't imagine that whenever it's built that a swingbridge would be considered financially viable.

Buford T Justice

I wasn't at the meeting myself, but I know that Jimmy McGarry, Declan Bree and Chris McManus

Jimmy McGarry Spoke out to say that he was in Support of Doorly park residents and was against the plan, and Declan Bree was at my door before the elections telling me how great it was to have O'Connel Street re-opened to traffic. Wow, look how that turned out declan, doesn't it look pretty now.

They want to unlink the regeneration from the eastern link bridge and they have already been told no. Perhaps its something to do with the effect that the bridge and new road will have on Cranmore residents and the cpo's that will be issued as a result. No point in regenerating 20 or 40 houses to issue cpo's to demolish them is there?

It was a typical squabbling match from what I've been told with no real plans about alternatives or what not, kinda why I didn't go to it, I've had enough of this waffle.

I'm open to correction on this, but tbh, it sounds like the typical Councillors in this county.

I mean, Seriously, what made them all of a sudden vote against the bridge? Its not as if there was mass protests about it or anthing. Not that that would matter I suppose, there was major protests about keeping O'Connel St pedestrianized, but they ignored all of what was being said.

Kick up a fuss, they do nothing, don't kick up a fuss and they'll suddenly change their mind on something. Unless of course it was voting season at the time

cranresident

I was at the meeting on Tuesday night. Bree is constantly claiming he had the support of the Cranmore Community to remove the bridge from the plan, well he was told out straight the other night he does not. What kind of kangaroo council do we have. They push to get the bridge moved forward in 2005, they sign off on the Gateway Inovation submission in 2007 which cleary connects the two projects. They sign off €750,000 to develop the bridge in 2007. And then they removed the bridge from the plan after receiving 279 submissions in favour of the bridge and not one against in 2008. Its a joke that they can try and justify this micky mouse behaviour

Essexboy

cranresident wrote: »

I was at the meeting on Tuesday night. Bree is constantly claiming he had the support of the Cranmore Community to remove the bridge from the plan, well he was told out straight the other night he does not. What kind of kangaroo council do we have. They push to get the bridge moved forward in 2005, they sign off on the Gateway Inovation submission in 2007 which cleary connects the two projects. They sign off €750,000 to develop the bridge in 2007. And then they removed the bridge from the plan after receiving 279 submissions in favour of the bridge and not one against in 2008. Its a joke that they can try and justify this micky mouse behaviour

The Doorly Park/ Martin Savage/Garavogue-Hazelwood Committee made a submision against the proposed site in early 2009: are you saying that they are not representative of local residents?

cranresident

Essex Boy, no I know they are representing a small number of residents but there was also another 38 submission in favour of re-instating the Eastern Link Bridge, which the councillors ignored. The councillors are suppose to make decision based solely on the consideration of the public interest and the common good of all of Sligo. They are constantly asking residents to get involved in the planning consultations, and then councillors take an undemocratic decision to remove the bridge even though the vast majority of the submission were in favour of the bridge. This is dictatorship ·

cranresident

dardevle wrote: »

....

did anyone present at last nights meeting offer an explanation as to why the cranmore area would only be deemed worthy of regeneration only when this bridge goes back on the plans??? why are they linked? everyone knows that the area needs regeneration, and that the residents deserve it but i think that it is the lowest of politics, to pitch neighbours and in some cases families against one another, lets face it - what it would come down to is the demise of one neighbourhood to regenerate another

also, if both of these projects are so inextricably linked - why has a scale model of the regeneration area been made available for public viewing ---but no model of the bridge ever produced??

...

Did the residents of that area ask for a scale model at the time as did the Cranmore residents in 2006

Buford T Justice

Essexboy wrote: »

The Doorly Park/ Martin Savage/Garavogue-Hazelwood Committee made a submision against the proposed site in early 2009: are you saying that they are not representative of local residents?

Maybe, but it was the support of the Cranmonre community that Declan bree was claiming to have

dardevle

....

in a case such as this i would have thought that a scale model of the bridge, to show the impact on the local area would be a requirement of the planning app - as regards the EIS.... and for it not to be provided raises some ??'s as to why...... perhaps because the cranmore model represents a rebirth for that community while a model of the bridge would show the detrimental impact on a 50 year old picturesque and vibrant community..... even on a small scale, the planners knew that would be an impossible sell for them.

....

cranresident

dardevle wrote: »

....

in a case such as this i would have thought that a scale model of the bridge, to show the impact on the local area would be a requirement of the planning app - as regards the EIS.... and for it not to be provided raises some ??'s as to why...... perhaps because the cranmore model represents a rebirth for that community while a model of the bridge would show the detrimental impact on a 50 year old picturesque and vibrant community..... even on a small scale, the planners knew that would be an impossible sell for them.

....

No we specially requested a model. The councillors Could of requested but let you down. Talk to them maybe we could even get a computer animation.

dardevle

cranresident wrote: »

No we specially requested a model. The councillors Could of requested but let you down. Talk to them maybe we could even get a computer animation.

....
but surely if both the projects are inseperable, then any scale model should show all of the proposed design and builds.

....

cranresident

Fingers McGee wrote: »

Maybe, but it was the support of the Cranmonre community that Declan bree was claiming to have

Well Declan Bree was told out straight by the residents of Cranmore that he does not have their support.

cranresident

dardevle wrote: »

....
but surely if both the projects are inseperable, then any scale model should show all of the proposed design and builds.

....

The bottom line is that this bridge has been in the plan since 1973, and the govement looked favourable on the cranmore regen becuase it fitted into the county development plan and the national spacial strategy. They had pumped millions into other regens such as Ballymun and Darndale but because they didn't consider the social and economical growth of the areas the regens were not successful in the integration of the community to the wider community. Bricks and morter will not bring about social and economic change in any community

dardevle

....
^^^^^^

the bottom line for me is that these should not have been linked... on its own merits cranmore deserves to be regenerated,... how many in the cranmore region would still support the bridge if, in the morning the government said that due to financial constraints only the bridge could go ahead and regeneration had to go on the long finger/ or not at all... while it would be for the 'greater good' -without the carrot of regeneration.....20,000 cars a day would be hard to swallow:(

but sure that could'nt possibly happen in this time of prosperity:o

...

cranresident

dardevle wrote: »

....
^^^^^^

the bottom line for me is that these should not have been linked... on its own merits cranmore deserves to be regenerated,... how many in the cranmore region would still support the bridge if, in the morning the government said that due to financial constraints only the bridge could go ahead and regeneration had to go on the long finger/ or not at all... while it would be for the 'greater good' -without the carrot of regeneration.....20,000 cars a day would be hard to swallow:(

but sure that could'nt possibly happen in this time of prosperity:o

...

I believe the vast majority would support it as they are concenrned about their children's future and the future of Sligo. Cranmore Regeneration has empowered the community and only for the work of their community co-op would still be very much in the dark regarding regeneration and in the importance of the development of Sligo.

And not because of the local representitives.

Buford T Justice

cranresident wrote: »

Well Declan Bree was told out straight by the residents of Cranmore that he does not have their support.

Not arguing with you. Merely pointing out that Declan Bree was Claiming to have the Support of the Cranmore residents with a vote against the bridge, when the point was made that the Doorly Park/ Martin Savage/Garavogue-Hazelwood Committee made a submision against the proposed site in early 2009. Cranmore didn't, whatever about the rest of them

dardevle

cranresident wrote: »

I believe the vast majority would support it as they are concenrned about their children's future and the future of Sligo. Cranmore Regeneration has empowered the community and only for the work of their community co-op would still be very much in the dark regarding regeneration and in the importance of the development of Sligo. And not because of the local representitives.

.. and i believe otherwise- simply because,before Finneran announced that 'hey presto' both projects are linked, there was little if anything heard from Cranmore co-op as regards the bridge, ....then they changed the goal posts when things were not going their way as regards the bridge and are now sitting back as the two communities fight it out, its a disgrace! regeneration should happen, the people of cranmore deserve it but the fight is at government level who are denying the funding from you.....not doorly park/ martin savage.

....

...

cranresident

dardevle wrote: »

.. and i believe otherwise- simply because,before Finneran announced that 'hey presto' both projects are linked, there was little if anything heard from Cranmore co-op as regards the bridge, ....then they changed the goal posts when things were not going their way as regards the bridge and are now sitting back as the two communities fight it out, its a disgrace! regeneration should happen, the people of cranmore deserve it but the fight is at government level who are denying the funding from you.....not doorly park/ martin savage.

....

...

Sorry but your to get your facts right it was Cranmore Co-op whi invited the minister to Sligo, which the councillors try to hijack the meetings. They were up in arms since September 2009 when they realised they had been sold out by our councillors.
You need to go back to 2007 and look at the Gateway Inovation Submission which clearly links the two projects, which our councillors signed off, the same councillors who are objecting to the bridge. We didnt link the project but councillors did approve the link at this stage. And we are not fighting with any community our fight is with the Councillors not Doorly park/Martin Savage and your right our fight is at government level, local government. If they will sell us out at the drop of a hat then they will do the same to you. When they seen this problem 2 years ago they should of tried to bring the two communities together to find a solution but they didnt. Cowards. You are working with your councillors now and we thought we were for the last 6 years. Watch your back

dardevle

...

carrying on this fight only at local level is exactly what was hoped for, to bring pressure to bear in order to railroad this bridge through.. when all the dust settles just remember that the government 'used' Cranmore to try to get a bridge built and no matter what spin is put on it...that's not a right and proper way to govern,local government did'nt sell you out,this fianna Fail led regime used you as a pawn.

i'm not going to comment any further on this except that when you say watch your back ..if you take a look around you and see who has aligned themselves with your cause-the fianna fail party-chamber of commerce and the county manager, then i can only give you one piece of advice...watch your back!
...

Buford T Justice

dardevle wrote: »

local government did'nt sell you out,this fianna Fail led regime used you as a pawn.

Local Government approved the plans, and then all of a sudden Local Government then decided that they were going to object to some of the plans. How is this an issue as a national political level?

cranresident

Fingers McGee wrote: »

Local Government approved the plans, and then all of a sudden Local Government then decided that they were going to object to some of the plans. How is this an issue as a national political level?

You hit the nail on the head. I would ask Sligo Residents to familarise themselves with the documentation including the Gateway Inovation Fund Submission (Nov 07) which clearly links the bridge with Cranmore Regenration, this was signed off by local Borough Council and submitted to the govement. So who linked the bridge with Cranmore.