samuel j
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Perhaps the bold Bishop had his laptop with him when he met the Pontiff running their “The hi tech computer display which allows visitors a 3D view of what the new interior will look like”
or perhaps the whole discussion too was only virtual reality….
@descamps wrote:
Does that mean we are lying again?
Whats the term so often used in Dail Eireann…”disingenuous”
By any chance were you able to earwig any snippets of what the New plan might entail….
Thats the question…..
Will they standover the alleged comment he made “he had spoken to the Local Planning Authority (Cobh Town Council) and he was given to understand that they would be “cooperative” and try to help in any way possible with whatever he might want to do.” or are we to take this as their greenlight to anything he comes up with once a “new plan”. Does this mean approval in their minds is a foregone conclusion…. or they believe the church and the OPW come under the same umbrella and OPW stands for Override Planning WisdomSo excluding a superfast Palmtop running Powerpoint with a neck breaking slideshow, its fairly safe to assume very little on St. Colmans was discussed. Lets keep this high on mental notes when more of his delusions are relayed to the trusting flock as fact….
@descamps wrote:
He told them that he had been to Rome and had spoken to the Pope. He said that he had shown a new set of plans and photographs for Cobh Cathedral to the Pope. He insinuated that the Pope told him to go ahead with them – though he allowed himself sufficient room to back out of this should awkward questions be asked at a later date
More interestingly, he said that when he had spoken to the Local Planning Authority (Cobh Town Council) and he was given to understand that they would be “cooperative” and try to help in any way possible with whatever he might want to do. They told him to bring back a new set of plans to them, he said.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Magee_(bishop)
On 26 October 2006, Pope Benedict XVI met Bishop Magee in a private audience that, surprisingly, lasted only eight minutes.
If we take out 2 minutes for the formal hello and goodbye…. he must have got alot done in 6 minutes…“Cooperative”, thats nice of them…. looks like the bold Bishop and the OPW are in some unique little club here as when it comes to planning issues can guarantee you most mortals in Cobh only dream about a cooperative planner
Did I see you were looking for photos of church in cloyne itself…..know lad living in the area, could ask him to get for me,…..
Ah lads you’re making it very hard for us…… I’m mininmising and maximising windows here to beat the band trying to get translations….. not my fault the wise owls took Latin off the curiculum 2 years before I went to secondary school……
@Rhabanus wrote:
. When you pay your diocesan news staff, as Leo paid Raphael, you tend to get the desired result rather than the unvarnished truth.
aka a mutual admiration society…a common occurance in all organisations…..
If in the high profile case of St. Colman’s it emerged (and correct me if I’m wring) that Re-ordering
was not required by any stretch of the liturgucal requirements of the Catholic Church, why were and are, so many hell bent on continuing with this destruction.Is there some naive belief by these parishes/church elders that it will bring about some new found interest
in the church and stem the dwindling church attendances.From reading some of the old threads on Cobh debacle and the FOSCC website, it seems to have had the reverse reaction and if anything was a road to alienating even more Catholics…lapsed and otherwise.
Is is purely down to the egoes of individuals within these parishes to leave some mark of their being…. some mark…. what is the logic behind it..
It would appear in any of the cases I seen that the majority (Catholics, non catholics, practising, not practising…the people) are against such re-ordering
undoubtedly all for their varying reasons, but regardless a majority….. it would appear that such re-ordering is not a given under any liturgucal requirement, so why does it continue…. Dollymount being a case in fact, recently posted on this thread….@jungle wrote:
I don’t see ho it related to Cobh UDC
The Fota road has nothing to do with them and the large bulk of new development in Cobh has been outside the UDC boundaries.
BTW I have a feeling that the theory was that the new residents would travel by train and I’m sure a lot of them do, but that’s only practical if you’re working in Cork City Centre or Little Island and with two parents working in most families nowadays, I wonder how many there are where that is true for both of them.
You are right most developments are outside, my house is inside udc area but i’m looking directly at new houses that are not. All the new occupants cars park outside their house at nigh etc. in CCC area but clog up road by me every morning in UDC area. My point being in practical/real world they the same thing.
Not the fault of new occupants, so don’t get me wrong but roads by me and Fota Road are all having increased traffic and I do not believe this was given much thought by UDCs or CCC.
The train most definately is being used more and in last few years a much more reliable service (than when I was growing up and commuting to Cork) but a hell of alot moe cars on the great Island and know
most of develpments near me are all 2 cars familes as you describe, many using Cross River ferry as many working in the pharma ind. in Ringaskiddy…..@THE_Chris wrote:
Fix the Fota Road plz 🙂
Road, more like the Fota 4×4 Test Track.
When planning was and still is being given for numerous new housing develpements in Cobh, they must have thought the occupants would come by sea…. as little thought seems to have been given on the massive increase this would have on the Fota Track traffic….
