Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
Limerick.ie / Vimeo
THERE HAS BEEN criticism of plans for a massive new development in Limerick as it has emerged they do not include any housing, despite an indication from the council two years ago that residential units would be included.
The project was given the go-ahead in 2015, and at the time Limerick City and County Council opened the development to expressions of interest. The council also said in 2015 that the site would be a mix of office, retail, residential and educational units.
However, plans presented to council members in June did not include a provision for accommodation of any kind. ‘Project Opera’ is being undertaken by Limerick Twenty Thirty, a strategic development designated activity company (DAC) tasked with developing a number of key sites in Limerick.
The presentation given to councillors described the site as a “major opportunity for new business activity”. Plans include the construction of four new buildings and the use of four existing buildings for office, retail and cultural use.
A planning application was submitted in June and the decision to grant it will be made by Limerick City and County Council, which still owns the site.
Local Solidarity councillor Cian Prendiville criticised the new plans and is encouraging residents of Limerick city to make submissions to the council, urging it to include housing on this site.
“It is very good to finally see some progress in terms of this vacant site, six years after the council bought it. However, there is a lot of disappointment with the lack of vision in the proposals,” he said.
The council is proposing to spend €150m building four multi-storey office blocks on this site, and redeveloping four existing buildings, again as offices, with not a single apartment on the site. This is in the middle of a housing crisis, with almost no affordable, quality apartments available in the city centre, and rents already going through the roof. While not everyone wants to live in the city centre, more and more young people in particular are looking for that option.
“The Opera site has the potential to be an amazing project, and a lively space to live, work and socialise in the city. However, we don’t want another deadzone after 6pm, and at weekends.”
Prendiville said the Georgian buildings in particular could be turned into apartments for young people and families who want to live in the city centre. He said he would like to see a mix of quality, affordable and social housing for people to rent or buy.
A video on the councillor’s Facebook page, outlining his objection to these plans, gained traction this week, with a number of Limerick residents expressing their disappointment on his page.
“Cities are for people. The more people who live in the city centre, the more vibrant it becomes after 5pm and the more attractive it becomes for business. The council in Limerick is in a unique position with access to land and money to help ease both the housing crisis and reverse the donut effect which has led to the hollowing out of the city centre,” one said. “The fact that the council are currently proposing to build on a massive site and not facilitate a single home beggars belief”.
“Building high quality social housing in the city centre would actually benefit the businesses in the city,as more people living in the centre means more people shopping, I think that’s a no-brainer really,” another commented.
One man said it was “ridiculous” to build such a large complex in the city centre without any provision for housing. And another said more city centre housing would “inevitably benefit city businesses too”.
However, some people who reacted to Prendiville’s comments were in favour of the new business development.
“Social affordable housing in the middle of a new development that’s meant to attract new businesses and ventures to Limerick city? Fair enough if there’s apartments there, but don’t think they should be social housing units,” one man said.
“Nope, social housing will drive away any business from investing. Keep them separate it never works. Develop separate areas for both,” another commented.
In response to a query from TheJournal.ie, Limerick Twenty Thirty said it “conducted significant market research” and had “submitted proposed plans based on this – essentially delivering what the market wants”.
“Through that level of investment and resultant employment of up to 3,000 people at the site, we will create the market for residential properties, leading to significant investment in the development of a range of residential sites across Limerick”.
The Opera site scheme will take six years to deliver and Limerick Twenty Thirty said that, in parallel with that, it will be working with relevant stakeholders with regards to Limerick’s residential requirements.
“This will be delivered through a mix of private sector and local authority investment. With regard to the latter, Limerick CCC has received funding from the Local Infrastructure Housing Activation Fund to develop 400 houses in Mungret by 2021 and, together with plans for Greenpark, there’s potential for 3,400 homes at these two sites alone,” Limerick Twenty Thirty said.
“Additionally, there is ongoing work in relation to the revitalisation of Limerick city’s historic urban core to maximise the residential potential of Georgian Limerick.
“Ultimately, we are fully satisfied that the mix of commercial and residential investment in the offing is the right one and will ensure Limerick becomes one of the fastest growing and vibrant working and living cities in Europe over the next decade and more.”
Submissions to the council about the development of the Opera site can be made until 25 August.
A clever take on legislation and another reason to celebrate . Brilliant congrats and “f” the begrudgers
@Christian White: so no straight people ever married for money
@bmul: not that I am aware of no.
@Christian White: so all those young models with 70 odd year old millionaires is love
@bmul: Lol
@Christian White: “not that I’m aware of”
@Christian White: and if he was an old woman?
@Skinnerbot: if you are aware of a similar case involving a straight couple then by all means please link to it.
@Christian White: Henry XIII right up to Hugh Hefner, and millions in between made a mockery of marriage by your logic
@Christian White: so it has to be spelt out for you no independent thought
@bmul: I can’t speak to the motives of unknown hypothetical cases but we do know for fact that the introduction of gay marriage has enabled these two men to commit fraud.
@Christian White: hahaha of course you can’t you muppet
@Christian White: fraud lol would you cop on.
@Christian White: thats plainly not true, from hearing them discuss it there is clearly a great deal of love between these two men. The only difference between this and a more conventional marriage is the stated intention not to partake in sexual congress.
@Christian White: not sure the feeling was always mutual though. I love my best mate as much as any girlfriend, so just shut it and get to your homophobic nuances already. ‘‘Twas the gays that did it, old man yells at cloud
@Skinnerbot: no,because they didn’t marry to evade tax,try to stay on topic
@Christian White: Um, it’s a same sex marriage, not a gay marriage
@Tedser: aye because marrying for tax purposes has never been done before? You’ll find I’m bang on topic
@Conor Flood: Is their stated reason not “an impediment”?
@Skinnerbot: you cited Henry 8th and Hugh Hefner as your examples,neither married for tax purposes,
@Tedser: I’m aware of that ye, but surely they made a mockery of marriage? No?
The claim my good friend above is making is that the gays have gone and opened the floodgates by demanding equality; which misses the mark as it’s a case of loopholes in archaic tax laws around marriage that are the issue here, not the equal treatment of the LGBT community leaving a stain on my friends interpretation of marriage
@Skinnerbot:
King Henry XIII
To six wives he was wedded
One died,One survived
Two divorced, two beheaded.
@Christian White: Henry beheaded two of them.
@Christian White: you should have asked god to stop it then !
@Aine O Connor: Beheaded two of them? That must have been ok so … for some commentators lol
@Christian White: Christian White, you truly are the definition of a jackass.
@Conor Flood: Inheritance tax is a legitimate tax and this is an illegitimate use of the law to avoid paying what is correctly owed which has nothing to do with begrudgery.
@Christian White: The catholic church tells us marraige is the only game in town. everything else is a sin.
@Christian White: why are you pointing the finger at gay people? The two men in question have openly said they are straight. It’s the straight people making mockery of marriage if anything. If they mean that much to each other and care that much about each other, as far as I’m concerned, good on them and the best of luck to them both.
@Christian White: well you should talk to the straight people who are abusing the system. Neither one of them is gay. So it wasn’t the gays that debased marriage.
@Christian White: One man can’t afford to pay his friend to look after him in his old age so instead gives him his house after his death and doesn’t want him losing hundreds of thousands in tax… What a scam. Oh and Christian, the example you’re looking for is Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes.
@Christian White: your 100% wrong, they have not broken any laws whatsoever according to the revenue & lawyers. So stick that in your pipe & smoke it. If your such a devout catholic why do you think is up to you to judge people? Lead your own life the way you want and leave others to do the same. Your not god & have no business in other people’s decisions!
@Christian White: Marraige has debased itself, in Ireland it happenesd in 1996 when we made divorce legal, if you want marraige to be sacred then move to the Vatican where they have no proceudre for divorce and you can live by your vows knowing that they actually mean something.
If you’d rather stay in a millennial Ireland then grow with the times, the tax is the flaw in this instance, everyone should have the right to leave what they have worked their entire lives for to whomever they chose, and be allowed to die knowing that that loved one will not iccur any financial burden as a result.
I havent read the other replies to your bias statement, that I can only assume comes from a homophobic individual, but I hope your attention has been brought to the fact that this isnt the first marraige that is soley for tax purposes, and they were certainly happening long before the state decided to recognise the rights of our homesexual citizens.
@Christian White: moron
@Sean Conway: Most religions agree.
Makes a mockery of the whole equality legislation. It wasn’t passed for that.
@Hank_Scorpio: it makes a mockery of archaic tax laws not gay marriage
@Hank_Scorpio: There’s probably been countless straight couples marrying for this exact reason before – they just didn’t broadcast it on the radio!
@frank murphy: Just because you’re sexually attracted to your dog, doesn’t mean anyone else is! Don’t lump us all in with you…
@Hank_Scorpio: marriage is primarily about property, money and social standing more than transient romance. Nothing wrong with what they’re doing, perfectly in spirit with marriage.
@frank murphy: Whatever you’re into, you weirdo.
@Hank_Scorpio: I think it’s brilliant. The average joe pulls one over on the gangster government.
@Hank_Scorpio: If they consummated the marriage, would you be happy then Hank? It’s none of your business. The advantages as well as the disadvantages of marriage are available to everyone equally in a progressive society. Your bigotry (or maybe just ignorance) is part of the past.
@WJ Dunphy: I don’t care what they do. However the equality legislation was passed so same sex couples could marry. They are the same sex but not a couple. They are using the legislation to avoid tax.
@WJ Dunphy: Hang on now, your the second person to accuse Hank of bigotry. I say more luck to the two lads and I’m not familiar with Hank’s comment history but how is what he is saying bigoted? Surely the intention of the marriage equality referendum was to allow gay people to marry, not straight friends to avoid inheritance tax? “Bigot” and “racist” are thrown around so much they’ve lost meaning
*you’re
@John Doe: spot on. Fair play.
@Misanthrope: Marriage is about giving families additional protections under law. People get married to protect their families and the state recognises that through incentives and rights not available to those who are unmarried.
These blokes are not acting in the “spirit of marriage”. They are acting in the spirit of preserving wealth.
The vast majority of marriages in Ireland produce children. That’s the spirit of marriage.
@Daniel Wilson: Our tax law applies applies inheritance tax to non related persons and to non spouses – I don’t know what’s archaic or dysfunctional about that. Moreover this has nothing to do with ‘gay’ marriage, it would be equally wrong if this was a marriage between and man and woman. If tax is owed it should be paid.
@Niall Sullivan: not if your male, zero protection unless your married to another man.
@Hank_Scorpio: and your point Is? At least this way the government doesn’t get to ride the gentlemen.
@Hank_Scorpio: it was passed so anybody regardless of gender could marry and anybody, male or female, gay or straight can take advantage of the tax exemption for whomever they choose as a spouse.
I bet you don’t question the motives of opposite sex marriages.
@Hank_Scorpio: why do people refer to the “marriage equality” referendum? It was nothing of the sort. The correct title is the “same-sex marriage” referendum. Nothing to do with equality. Marriage Equality was a lobby group set up to lobby for men to marry other men and women to marry other women, mostly for tax, property and inheritance reasons. That is why these two men have legally married. Equality? Love? Nah! Just tax.
Fair play as half the world and his wife get married for financial reasons.
@Mick Tobin: Only if they’re already boyfriend/ girlfriend, so, no, you’re wide of the mark Micko.
@James Grant: boyfriend and girlfriend is just a trial period for marriage
@James Grant: even the mail order brides
@Mick Tobin: Oh Michael has mr or mrs right not landed into your arms with that charming recant
Tax evasion is wrong, tax avoidance is not.
Heterosexual couples have been getting married for questionable reasons for eons and nobody bats an eyelid. Why does it bother people so much when two guys do it?
Plus they’re not complete strangers, they are obviously very close friends. Much closer than many heterosexual couples that age.
@Tweety McTweeter:
Spot on. Perfect way to close this thread.
@Tweety McTweeter: Can I assume you have zero issue with tax avoidance, irrespective of who is pursuing it?
@MK76:
Absolutely. If it’s within the letter of the law, I’m sure you would try to avoid tax too. It’s up to the legislature to close tax loopholes and implement a reasonable and enforceable tax system.
@Tweety McTweeter: You have no issue with vulture funds having charitable status and Facebook and Google’s effective tax rates in this country because it’s within the letter of the law?
@Tweety McTweeter: I’m with you, but wasn’t sure if you were another one of the keyboard heroes who think its okay for the guy like them to do it, but not the other guy.
@Tweety McTweeter: And it’s not cast in stone that the older guy will die first anyway (although it’s statistical likely) . The younger guy should prepare a will or all his assets would go to the older lad and then onto his extended family by default.
Friends for 30 years but not in a sexual relationship, it’s just like my marriage.
@Ron North:
And it was all for the money too
Should have voted No.
@Hey There Lovely!: no campaigners certainly proven right in this regard anyway.
@Hey There Lovely!: Why didn’t you so?
@Hey There Lovely!: are you single, aging and have a property?
Great jesture , haven’t big business being finding tax loopholes for years ,rubbing everyone’s nose in it .apples will be apples .Go for it and enjoy .
Love the tongue in cheek kiss lol..two fingers to the taxman lol
Congratulations.
Tax evasion is wrong whether it’s DOB or these guys.
@Christian White: I bet you’d try to evade tax too if you got half a chance. If not your the fool. The government wastes our money left, right and centre. And besides, why should we be taxed on something that’s rightfully ours. Inheritance tax is one of the most scandalous taxes.
@JJ: then lobby to have the law changed, don’t break it.
@Christian White: You should tax your own advice. Under current law these guys are doing nothing illegal. If you don’t like that, then you obviously know what you need to do.
@Tommy Roche: take*
@Christian White: paying the government a huge tax bill to inherit something that a loved one has worked hard for and paid tax as they earn…is a crime. Its completely sick the amount the government can screw you for! Imagine paying the government €100,000 to continue living in a house you’ve been living for years in already!! Money for nothing for them. It’s an absolute scandal!
@Christian White: correct – but this is tax avoidance. All legal.
@Christian White: It’s NOT tax evasion.
@Anne: I get your point but when very wealthy people distribute their estate to their children then same rules should apply? There are limits in place and this tax does fund health etc – then – in effect the non wealthy will need to stump up more. This is a careful what you wish for scenario!
@Anne: So, a business man invests in property, makes a killing, and his children can inherit 10s of millions………….and it’s ok?
@Christian White: There’s a difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance. It seems you just troll for attention.
@Christian White: It’s not tax evasion you eejit. Tax evasion is a crime. These two gentlemen are totally within the law.
@Christian White: avoidance not evasion
This is what happens when a country votes for the pretense of gay marriage and fair play to them for exposing the so called “marriage equality referendum” for the nonsense it is. Why shouldn’t they take advantage of the farcical nonsense this state made out of the institute of marriage?
Real marriage will always be the union of one man and one woman.
President Lincoln once asked his cabinet “How many legs does that dog have” pointing at a dog in the room. “4″ was the bewildered reply. “How many does it have if you count the tail as a leg”? Lincoln added. “5″ was the reply.
“No” said Lincoln. “calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it so”.
Dito with the modern farce we have made of the institution of marriage.
Best of luck to them both may they have many happy years together
Watched their interview on “Claire Byrne Live” , the older man made the point that if he were to go into a nursing home , as he would otherwise need to , he would be costing the state thousands a month. The younger man was effectively homeless – so again, a saving on the state not to have to pay emergency accommodation for him .
I say good luck to them.
So many people are thrilled to see two supposedly hetero men being gay. It’s very strange.
@James Grant: I don’t think they ever mentioned anything in their interviews about being gay?
@Jack O’Connell: They might ‘catch the gaye’
The World is in the middle of a nervous breakdown me thinks..
Does this mean we should now legalize ‘sham’ marriages? Why should Abdul be deprived of the right to marry his Latvian princess, whom he has never met before?
@Liam: that makes sweet FA sense
@WJ Dunphy: Sham marriage for tax reasons, sham marriage for immigration reasons. Both equally sham and both equally illegal, one would assume.
@Ron North: Not the same thing. Your rights as an Irish citizen always trump the rights of any would-be immigrants.
@WJ Dunphy: Your comment seems random and unrelated to the comments made so far, it is also incorrect.
@Ron North: No a real relationship exists between these two, a sham is when no real relationship exists, but people are marrying for some other benefit, like immigration, if he was marrying a woman he had no intention of ever having sex with and wasn’t sexually attracted to but had been his friend for 30 years no one would bat an eyelid
The big winners are Michaels there children. It’s a situation that needs more evaluation for sure
Sure why not..fair play to them i say
And they lived happily ever after!
I have a long term friend ,we go everywhere together and when the same sex marriage referendum was passed we laughed as it is now technically legal for us to marry, except I quickly told her,
“I would do anything for you but I won’t do that” House or no House.
I think most straight people just think it’s a step too far as the only reason it’s happening is to get around inheritance tax.
If the revenue want to do something about it they have the power. Broadcasting what they are doing might backfire on them yet.
It’s all BS.
If they wanted inheritance rights they could have had a civil partnership a few years ago.
Muppet Show
@Michael Maher:
And your the main STAR
@Casper:Come out from your hiding place
@Michael Maher:
LOL
@Casper: I’m laughing
@Michael Maher:
Lololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololol
ME TOO
Why Not?I’m delighted for them.They look like they are very happy and that’s all that matters isint it?
They “fudged” the tax system……lol
Why tell every one?
@Catherine cahill: maybe to highlight the issue that someone should be able to leave a house to someone they shared it with, without having tax implications because they aren’t married irrespective of what their sexual orientation or gender is.
Marriage !!!!, a pagan ceremony, if u happen to believe in the sanctity of marriage then thats worse, u give urself to someone for life in front of God knowing that u cant promise a commitment like that, why wud anyone do that?? The virgin Mary wasnt married and had a child out of wedlock from a different man, so if any of ye ever strayed ur in good company, u can be married now for lots of reasons which makes a mockery of the whole thing, as for living in sin, well we all do that..
@Slim Browne:
Obviously you’ve never met the right person yet so until you do stop talking shite
@Casper: casper. U dont come across as a friendly ghost , fyi ive been happily married since 1986, 2 kids, 6grandkids and a loving wife, not all are as lucky as me and it wasnt the fact that I was married that made our relationship it was both of us on the same page , we raised our kids the best we cud , we asked for nowt and we got nowt we just went along with reality and I didnt need to be married to do that, if u love someone ul know it, if u fall out of luv ul know it, and ul move on and u wont have broken a promise that u cud never keep, did u know that crows stay together for life, never seen a crows wedding tho.
@Slim Browne:
Very well said, and I wish you your wife and kids a happy Xmas and all the best for the New year
@Casper: same to u my friend
You can bet the gov and revenue will fnd a way around this and change the law..but fair play to them
@James O’Brien: they’ll send someone around to your house to make sure you consecrate the marriage. Or no new status.
If you are a man marrying another man then you are gay as christmas.
@Christian White: is Christmas gay?
Is Santa Clause code for something?
Does it really matter at all?
@Christian White: Christmas celebrates the birth of Jesus, an unmarried man who hung out with a harem of other men. Mary Magdalene was probably written in to make him look het.
@DaisyChainsaw: don’t you just “love” the “love both” crowd that are on here commenting :-) there is soooo much “love” coming from them :-)
If you put aside the tax and inheritance issues, in my very humble opinion the spiritual basis of this marriage is misguided. Its a decision motivated by money and I know there s a lot of actions motivated by money but the intention of marriage is supposed to be a declaration to the world of a long term commitment to each other in principle. Gays, lesbians,etc… Fought to have that right enshrined in Irish law because they want to have that equality of recognition. To me this lessens the spiritual union of marriage n I m not religious. Anyone can disagree n have a totally different opinion n that’s life.
The ball sacs will be bashing together tonite !! :-)
Enjoy the wedding night
Congratulations lad’s
Distill off all the crap like love and hearts and confetti and romance and face up to the fact that marriage is a contract. Full stop.
Marriage should take place with both parties wearing dark business suits, carrying briefcases, in a boardroom with their solicitors present. Just to ensure they understand the gravity of what they’re about to sign up to.
@Charlie Farrell:
Live and let live
@Charlie Farrell: Amazing isn’t it. You buy a house, you go get legal advice, you start a business, you get legal advise, but you enter into a life long legally binding contract that will cost you a fortune to get out of (marriage) and no one goes and gets any legal advice.
@Brian McDonnell: love is blind. But these guys have their eyes wide open.
I bet they were watching the last couple of episodes of Boston Legal and thought we can do that
Lots of comments. Some judgmental and not though through. But mostly good. I hope. Me, I say what legends. Hope it works out. Legends
The first 16k only would be free from inheritance tax and the rest would all be taxed at 33 percent. In America people can inherit 1 million without any tax. Ireland has one of the meanest inheritance tax regimes in the world. It’s another mean tax grab by the government.Fine Gael promised to review inheritance tax in the last budget and failed.
I have no problem with what they’ve done, but I thought openly admitting it on tv and radio might cause them problems. Sham marriage legislation has been introduced to prevent marrying just to achieve citizenship. I’d say the relevant government department is stroking their chins……
http://www.thejournal.ie/sham-marriages-ireland-3724543-Nov2017/
SWEET DEAL
Delighted for u both, congrats
Imagine Victor and Jack getting hitched in Still Game and thats it.
Arseholes
@James: This isn’t the place to expose your rinming fettish James :o
Walden and Alan Harper Schmidt
have your say