3.5.1 Issues raised by respondents opposed to boundary change The 8 types of standard format accounted for 18,887 of the 19,131 submissions. They therefore reflect both the majority of submissions and the most prominent issues or concerns raised by those opposed to any change in the current boundary. At the same time, there was a high degree of consensus with regard to the issues raised across the form types. In summary, the main points made were: The sense of identity and belonging to County Kilkenny which would be lost in the event of a boundary extension. There are clear examples of co-operation between the two Councils and this should form the model for the future. A boundary extension would have significant negative financial implications for County Kilkenny due to loss of revenue from, for example, commercial rates and Local Property Tax. The movement of population would undermine existing Municipal District boundaries. Coordination and co-operation across the South East can be progressed through the Regional Assembly while still respecting existing boundaries and sense of identity. Changing the boundary would have a divisive effect on relations between the two counties. Kilkenny County Council has made significant investment within the Area of Interest in recent years which benefits the region as a whole. It would now lose out on a return on its investment as a result of boundary change. The investment made in Belview area was cited as an example. Boundary change could impact parish/Diocesan boundaries and the viability of sporting clubs in the area. The loss to County Kilkenny of planned population growth in the Area of Interest would have a negative impact on the revenue base to fund services and infrastructure in South Kilkenny. That Kilkenny County Council is fully competent to provide efficiently all the necessary services in the area. 21 An enhanced co-operative approach between the two Councils for the benefit of Kilkenny, Waterford and the South East could serve as an alternative to boundary change.
3.5.2 Issues raised by respondents in favour of boundary change Among the submissions in favour of a change to the existing boundary, a number of issues were frequently raised by respondents. In summary, their main points were: Kilkenny County Council has never invested properly in the area. A Boundary Extension would lead to improved planning in the Area/ there have been poor planning decision in the past. The residents would benefit from the closer proximity to the service provider. 22 The community in the Area of Interest are marginalised from the rest of the county and are politically remote. A Boundary Extension would improve the quality of service, ensure increased efficiency and greater value for money. The issue of GAA identity should not be allowed to become an issue in decision making on local authority boundaries. There are very close links between Waterford City and the area with many residents originally from the City and many working or studying in the City.
azimuth17 wrote: » I think Robtri is approaching the issue from the wrong end. the real question to be asked is what will a boundary extension do for Waterford city?
robtri wrote: » from the article... if thats true its a disgrace it has been revealed that 19,100 people who made submissions on the issue were against the boundary change while only 35 submissions were in favour.
Jamie2k9 wrote: » It would impact 4,500, go figure who made those 19,000 submissions, would be good how many of those 4,500 made.
robtri wrote: » all of KK by the looks of it but only 35 in favour
Jamie2k9 wrote: » but the point is those 19,000 are irrelevant for the most part, they have done most of the job such as keeping Slieverue. 4,500 is nothing TBH and is there really a big difference to putting Co Waterford on the end of an address as that's all it is. I'm sure if there was a campaign in Waterford City to get submissions made the outcome would of easily been the other way round so how would you argue that? Chances are it won't happen because of a vote and FF won't abstain, TBH if they cleared it I couldn't see them losing seats as Kilkenny have never been heavily FG, farmers won't vote SF/LAB so all is left is IND and I don't see it either. FF are only against purely because of seat numbers, not because they actually give a s*hit about Kilkenny or Waterford.
robtri wrote: » this is about what best for the area... either way 19,000 in favour of keeping as is cant be ignored.. but u are right the politicians will ruin it...
robtri wrote: » no.. what will waterford city do for the area... cause all waterford city supporters here go on about is GAA crap and saying KK have done nothing for the area, so what will they do? what amenities/services will they provide for the residents of the area strange that no one can answer this Dublin extends into numerous counties and it works quite well yet no need to change boundaries...
Max Powers wrote: » If you read some of the submissions...
Max Powers wrote: » If you read some of the submissions, it was against people spouting the gaa rubbish kk virtually ignored the area,for one thing Waterford provides more social housing the area.if funding comes available, that and other investment will continue, Waterford has made progress on north quays and hopes to further develop jobs and development on north side of city.plans to connect better with pedestrian bridge.and also would help prevent silly attempts to undermine the city with massive oversized empty against spatial retail strategy development.the approaches to Waterford would be better maintained if controlled by Waterford,kkcoco should be ashamed the state of roads from motorway to Sally park.if it goes through, people over on north side will be able to access council facilities offices etc a stone throw away instead of mad situation of having to go to kk.the people who consider themselves from Waterford, educated in Waterford, working in Waterford will be able to vote for councillors and issues that directly affects their immediate area. So just a few things.
azimuth17 wrote: » There are so many errors written in the past few posts that I thought a couple corrections might be helpful. The Ardree Hotel is half in Waterford city and county Kilkenny , the boundary runs right through it, hence its derelict state was the responsibility of both local authorities. Waterford city council have pursued the owners to remedy the situation and the hotel has been reported as sold in recent weeks. The postal address of Dawn Meats in Grannagh was not altered for political reasons. The rule has always been that mail is directed to places using the nearest post town or city. Glenmore was always accurately addressed as Glenmore Waterford, Mullinavat Waterford, Kilmacow Waterford. This was a Post Office regulation and nothing else. I walk the Waterford Greenway regularly and the biggest eyesore is an old factory in Newrath. people over there told me it used to be Gouldings fertilisers. A lot of the response from obvious Kilkenny posters have failed to accept or are unwilling to accept that the regions that have done best are those with a strong regional city. To get that accepted in Kilkenny is a quite difficult job. The results are visible in the entire regional economy with unemployment still the highest in the land at some 10.5%
azimuth17 wrote: » The tone of Mr Kavanagh's posts suggests he is mired in a 19th century vision of manufacturing industry as all hammers, soot, shovels and dirt. Apple employ nearly 6500 in Cork in manufacturing and R&D. Genzyme, now Sanofi have invested nearly €600 million and rising in their specialised biotech plant at Old Kilmeaden Road in Waterford. Mr Kavanagh has probably never even seen it.....or the adjacent new WEST Pharma plant. Should Waterford not have competed for these industries? Throwing verbal and written stones at Waterford because you don't like a proposed boundary extension is useful to no one.
Michael Kavanagh wrote: » You idiot did I mention any of those industries in Waterford
Michael Kavanagh wrote: » azimuth17 wrote: » The tone of Mr Kavanagh's posts suggests he is mired in a 19th century vision of manufacturing industry as all hammers, soot, shovels and dirt. Apple employ nearly 6500 in Cork in manufacturing and R&D. Genzyme, now Sanofi have invested nearly €600 million and rising in their specialised biotech plant at Old Kilmeaden Road in Waterford. Mr Kavanagh has probably never even seen it.....or the adjacent new WEST Pharma plant. Should Waterford not have competed for these industries? Throwing verbal and written stones at Waterford because you don't like a proposed boundary extension is useful to no one. You idiot did I mention any of those industries in Waterford
robtri wrote: » The roads in Ferrybank under WCC control are in a worse state...
Michael Kavanagh wrote: » robtri wrote: » no.. what will waterford city do for the area... cause all waterford city supporters here go on about is GAA crap and saying KK have done nothing for the area, so what will they do? what amenities/services will they provide for the residents of the area strange that no one can answer this Dublin extends into numerous counties and it works quite well yet no need to change boundaries... The way it is with Waterford when you have nothing grab the nearest prospect you get your hands on that's worth something.
BorneTobyWilde wrote: » I don't get it. Why would it ever be right for one county to try steal land off another.
Suryavarman wrote: » Having a university in WAterford provides a lot more benefit to the region than waiting decades for Carlow to get up to the standard needed for Waterford and Carlow to have a a joint university. Waterford is the only urban area in the Southeast that is big enough to drive economic growth in the region. Everywhere else is far too small.
Jamie2k9 wrote: » but when those 19,500 don't live in the area, who are they to say it's best for the area, their opinion is just as valid as the people in charge of the review in that case.
