WCTU objects to latest city centre plans from KRM

Sully

WCTU objects to latest city centre plans from KRM
Friday, September 26th, 2008

The Waterford Council of Trade Unions has replied to an invitation from An Bord Pleanala to make its views known on the latest plans from KRM Construction regarding their proposed mixed use development at Stephen St, Alexander St, Michael St, New St and Castle St in Waterford City.

In reply, WCTU Secretary John Cloono told An Bord Pleanala that, from an early stage, WCTU considered KRM’s project for the site to have been the ‘wrong type of development in the wrong place’.

Referring to the latest situation, Mr Cloono said that, despite the developer having made some changes at the request of the Bord, very serious problems remained and WCTU contended that all of their appeal considerations were still valid.

Continued Mr Cloono: “Much of the height reduction sought by the Bord has occurred not on the fronting streets such as New St but within the complex, therefore undermining any attempt to reduce the monolithic nature and overbearing feeling of the structures. Most of the height behind Michael St has been retained and therefore negates any attempt to reduce overbearing and maintain the character of the street and its important buildings and streetscape. Height has also been retained at the bottom of Alexander St and will reduce daylight and sunlight to residents in this part of the street.

“Daylight and sunlight loss will affect amenity value to the rear of houses, not just in the gardens but to interior rooms also, because the new plans fail to increase the separation distance between the listed properties and the development at Alexander St as requested by the Bord.

Negative impacts

“The new treatment of the roof area because it appears to be closer to the houses, will allow overlooking to back gardens and rear windows at Alexander St. further reducing amenity. These negative impacts also apply to some houses on Castle St as well as Wyse Park because of the hotel design.

“Overall the development in this area is considered extremely bland having regard to its historic setting and represents in our view the worst type of shopping mall ‘cake on a plate’ architecture, inserted into a densely populated urban environment of narrow residential streets, which no amount of fancy cladding or trellis can disguise.

“Whilst there is some improvement in the re-designed hotel it still represents ‘off the shelf’ mediocrity with its ‘box and base’ design which can’t be rescued with colourful rendering and completely misses an opportunity to embrace and fulfil the potential of Wyse Park becoming an inner-city oasis with its Quaker burial grounds and medieval St.John’s Priory.

“The separation distance of the hotel from the city walls on Browns Lane is totally inadequate whilst the proposed hotel car park entrance opposite the French tower is unacceptable.

“We believe it is impossible to resolve satisfactorily the huge traffic problems associated with this project. The main access route via narrow Johns St from the busy N25 junction at Parnell St/ Manor St will make this junction positively dangerous.

“The pedestrian crossing at the Michael St / New St /Johns St would be even more lethal especially as HGVs would have to undertake unusual and difficult manoeuvres in confined circumstances to get into New St and the proposed centre.

Unacceptable risk

“The egress routes through narrow residential streets with a demographic of young families with children as well as elderly people would pose an unacceptable risk of serious accidents.

“Moreover the six schools surrounding the site at the access and egress routes represent significant constraints that cannot be overcome and in themselves should warrant the refusal of this application. Neither of the proposed options for the realignment of the Applemarket are viable and would have a negative impact on stall holders, taxi drivers, café bar owners and the residents of Spring Garden Alley and John’s Avenue.

“To date, the traders have not been contacted by the city council and they tell us they need every inch of space for their vans and stalls. They also say the proposed options would pose serious danger to themselves and their customers from traffic and seriously reduce footfall in the market.

“In our view the review of traffic requested by the Bord for the site and especially this area is totally inadequate and provides little or no new information. KRM’s suggestion that planning permission be granted prior to changes at the Applemarket is, in our opinion, outrageous.

“In this regard we would request the Bord to insist that the issues surrounding the plans for the Applemarket be resolved and the upgrading of the road network to facilitate this proposal as promised by City Council at oral hearings be completed before deciding on the application.

“We would also request the Bord to commission an independent assessment of the impact of the revised plans on the day-lighting and sun-lighting of the protected houses on Alexander Street prior to any final decision.”

Does this include Brendan McCann or has he not objected this time?

Also related..

Councillor Roche calls on WCTU executive to resign
Friday, September 26th, 2008

Waterford City Councillor Mary Roche describes herself as “flabbergasted” by the local Council of Trade Unions objection to the development of shopping and business in the heart of the city centre. And she calls on the Council’s executive to resign en-masse.

She asks how many of the wider membership of those unions which are members of the WCTU were consulted on this decision. And she further queries: “How can the workers of Waterford, especially the bottom-of-the-heap building workers, now signing on in their droves and looking at bleak futures, be represented by this decision?

“I contest that the WCTU executive is nothing more than the bitter leftovers of the Socialist Workers Party which, having received no electoral mandate of its own, has hi-jacked the WCTU and is still trying to perpetrate their own miserable, long failed and rejected policies.

“We are actively trying to encourage and develop shopping and job opportunities in the properly designated city centre, with a mandate through the democratically adopted City Development Plan. What a horror this presents to WCTU!

“It seems to me that WCTU would be far better employed doing what they are supposed to do and not spend wasted time and energy on issues for which, in all honesty, they have absolutely no mandate or responsibility”.

Will the Centre for the Unemployed ever re-open, she asks.

Calling on the executive of WCTU to resign en-masse immediately, she asks them to “vacate their positions to people who have the interests of the working and unemployed people of Waterford City at heart”.

mike65

Commies eh? Won't be happy till we're all poor.

Mike

Psychedelic

Sully wrote: »

Does this include Brendan McCann or has he not objected this time?

He made objections in his own name and through the Waterford Alliance for Sustainable Inner City Development:

Waterford Green Party representative, Brendan McCann, who is also a member of the Waterford Alliance but a separate appellant, submitted his own response to the redesign also.

http://www.waterford-today.ie/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4195&Itemid=1&ed=409


Re: Cllr Mary Roche, I'm glad someone in City Council has publicly criticised the WCTU.

Freddie59

No vote has been taken among grass root union members regarding this, so they're not speaking on any union member's behalf. End of story.

robtri

This development is critical for the city centre, at the moment like all other cities the shopping malls are starting to apear in the suburbs, this has a drasticeffect on the city centre taking busisness's out of the city centre and into these rings around the city. No business in city no people, the city strangles itself and waterford becomes like every other city... city centre is dead...
Yet along come KRM wanting to do something different to make sure this doesn't happen, provide jobs in an industry that very very badly needs it, and some group of imbeciles come along with twat like that.... it makes my blood boil.....

brendansmith

My god, anger level rising!:mad::mad:

Baby4

This post has been deleted.

gscully

Does this include Brendan McCann or has he not objected this time?

You kidding me? That guy's last breath will be to object to his own headstone!

Sully

gscully wrote: »

Does this include Brendan McCann or has he not objected this time?

You kidding me? That guy's last breath will be to object to his own headstone!

His name wasnt mentioned, was wondering. Was thinking "If Brendan didnt object, the planning application must be perfect!" Wishfull thinking

Suppose another years wait for a decission to be made eh.

gscully

Sully wrote: »

gscully wrote: »

His name wasnt mentioned, was wondering. Was thinking "If Brendan didnt object, the planning application must be perfect!" Wishfull thinking

Suppose another years wait for a decission to be made eh.

I think I read his name in an article in Waterford Today...?

I guess the articles at the top make the assumption that we already know he's got his name in there :-)

JohnC.

Who exactly are the WCTU anyway? I am a member of a union in Waterford and I've never heard of anything to do with them, except when they object to this kind of thing. Certainly never asked about my opinion on anything by them. They don't seem to have any kind of web page at least.

KingLoser

Kahless wrote: »

Who exactly are the WCTU anyway? I am a member of a union in Waterford and I've never heard of anything to do with them, except when they object to this kind of thing. Certainly never asked about my opinion on anything by them. They don't seem to have any kind of web page at least.

Ex SWP members mostly. John Cloono is a name I recognize anyway.

Sully

gscully wrote: »

Sully wrote: »

I think I read his name in an article in Waterford Today...?

I guess the articles at the top make the assumption that we already know he's got his name in there :-)

Yup.. when I read the first article I was thinking "No objection from Brendan?! Thats a bit odd.. application must be acceptable overall then!". Then someone linked to a Waterford Today article saying he has objected.

Shame. I assume they are the only objectors? Were locals and some businesses objecting the first time?

Psychedelic

Sully wrote: »

I assume they are the only objectors? Were locals and some businesses objecting the first time?

The guy who owns the army store has been opposed since the beginning.

Objectors/Appellants:

Brendan McCann
Waterford Alliance for Sustainable Inner City Development
Waterford Council of Trade Unions
Patrick Street and Stephens Street Traders Group
Noel McDonagh
Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government

http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/224299.htm