Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Tower Hotel / Lombard St. Dereliction

  • 23-04-2024 1:00pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 799 ✭✭✭


    Can anyone explain why Lombard St. still looks like Gaza if Neville Hotel Group finally got their hotel expansion planning go-ahead last summer?

    Is there still some legal dispute causing this dereliction or do Neville Hotels just not care how one of the main arteries through our city looks?



Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,151 ✭✭✭azimuth17


    DId the planning applicaton not omit these houses as the new development is to be built behind them? This wil leave the dereliction in place. Shocking looking.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 799 ✭✭✭Dunmoreroader


    Do Nevilles not still own the block and therefore still have a duty to maintain their appearance, especially if they are not going to be knocked as part of the hotel upgrade?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,432 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    theres very little deterrence towards dereliction in the country, its just another method to protect certain sections of society, it should be heavily taxed, but shur that ll probably never happen….



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 115 ✭✭Dum_Dum_2


    A heavy tax on insurance premiums that include clauses that cover dereliction. Nothing like an open-ended liability to focus minds.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 799 ✭✭✭Dunmoreroader


    I mean, how much would it cost them to throw a lick of paint on the eye-sore gable-end FFS??



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,650 ✭✭✭Asdfgh2020


    While Q’ing in traffic there the other day there were a few guys in high visibility vests and a construction vehicle ‘poking’ around at something…..could this be some sort of preparatory/ advance work ahead of the main works….?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 48 feckwunker


    I know the person who was behind the objection to the Tower developing these. This person is a serial objector who is genuinely holding Waterford back.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭dzilla


    they probably do, but its not the only building in town that has been left to dereliction. Its probably not enforceable.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 799 ✭✭✭Dunmoreroader


    I agreed with the original objections, listed buildings shouldn't have been slated for demolition to facilitate an easier extension, Neville's were badly advised. I 100% applaud their plan to extend the hotel, what they've built so far looks great but if the Lombard Street buildings are now not part of the extension, they shouldn't just be left to moulder. It's like Neville's are saying "Fcuk you Waterford, coz we couldn't get planning permission to knock down 1/2 of Lombard street to facilitate our proposed fancy-pants glass palace atrium hotel extension, you can watch the street slowly fall to bits instead". It seems self-defeating as it's not a great first impression for new guests turning into the carpark; "Is this Beirut or Waterford?"

    I know our planning system is crap, way too slow, but developers should be obliged by city by-laws to maintain sites to a high standard while awaiting p.p. particularly highly sensitive city-centre sites.

    I know it's not the law but it should be the law like in many countries in Europe.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,151 ✭✭✭azimuth17


    Totally agree. The houses in Lombard Street could be returned to domestic use quite easily. Might be expensive, but the work is simple, any competent builder could do it. I've seen much worse brought back to life in Dublin.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,432 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    …this approach definitely needs to be considered if we re to even attempt to resolve our housing issues, its true whats said, the most environmentally friendly house is the one that already exists, our whole approach to property, both commercial and residential, is a mess….



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 48 feckwunker


    My understanding was that the Tower were going to keep the facade of the buildings already in Lombard Street. I don't care personally whether they are repurposed for residential or whatever - just someone do something with them ffs.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 477 ✭✭Flow Motion


    If you are driving/walking around the back [Rose Lane] and look up you'll notice all the windows have been removed. Reckon the place is full of pigeons. Quite a few perching on the window ledges. Given the current dearth of houses/accommodation in the country these substantial buildings should not be lying idle. They've been like this for well over a decade. Recall there being a bookies/mortgage shop there on ground floors @ one point. Same with the old Alfie Hales premises & adjacent buildings. Should have been to better use.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,151 ✭✭✭azimuth17


    Work being done in the backs and upper floors of all those houses as far as I could see last week. Thats why the windows were removed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,632 ✭✭✭Yellow_Fern


    I hope they put in proper sashes. The steet is ruined with those outward opening windows



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 799 ✭✭✭Dunmoreroader


    Again, this should be enforceable by statutory City Bylaws. I know An Taisce write to property owners who are putting in modern uPVC double-glazed windows and whatnot in these listed buildings asking them not to but a summons from WCCC would be better.



Advertisement