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 all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
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
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
Boundary Extension for City?
Comments
-
Max Powers wrote: »This must be a new record for the most ridiculous negativity in a single post!
I think negativity is wrong word...idiotic, far fetched, delusional or living in their own misguided fantasy world for those not into the whole brevity thing.alas, it shows up the weakness of the against argument, get your submission in on the npf site as one thing for sure, the pitch fork crowd will be.
Correct! But the funny thing is that this is what you would expect from a keyboard warrior. But the depressing thing is that this is the type of distortion that is the common currency of Kilkenny Co. Co, John Paul Phelan and Christ Almighty Bobby Aylward. 50's Ireland at it's best! To hell with the evidence.0 -
Squidvicious wrote: »
Took me a while to get back to you. Firstly, I don't appreciate being told to listen very carefully or told that I'm embarrassing myself. I don't believe that I have been insulting to anyone else here, so let's try to keep this civil. The fact that I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm thick. Sometimes people can have honest disagreements.
I really don’t care what you appreciate. I don’t appreciate having to go over the same sh!t over and over again for the benefit of someone who is either too lazy to inform themselves or just plain lying! You ARE embarrassing yourself. You made a ridiculous claim that nobody gave justifiable reason for the extension.Squidvicious wrote: »
The Shopping Centre? Yes, it's a mess. However, it's not as though KKCC went and built it. Remember that An Bord Pleanala granted it permission too. Dunnes initially signed up to a lease. A bank, presumably funded it. So that's a number of other parties who supported it and thought that it could succeed. It was built in different times when Ferrybank looked like expanding rapidly(and Ferrybank will
do so again).
Banks don’t do planning so that point is moot. Dunnes Stores don’t do planning so that is also not relevant at all. An Bord Pleaneala arbitrate disputes! If there is no objection they will not get involved. So ABP did not endorse it. There was a subterfuge involved in the final application where the application was made, objected too by Waterford, withdrawn and made again. This is how it got through! If Waterford CC had been quicker off the mark and less trusting they would have objected and it would have been undoubtedly objected. Nothing at all to do with ABP[/quote]
Using the banks as an endorsement for this is like Jimmy Saville endorsing a kindergarten!Squidvicious wrote: »
Bilberry? My point is that that's a part of Waterford which was not developed until very recently. Everyone seems to assume that Ferrybank would be like the Dunmore Road if it had been part of Waterford. However, until Carn Glas was built in the 90's, you could reach open countryside a few hundred yards from Supervalu. So that's an area of Waterford even less developed than Ferrybank until very recently despite being under Waterford's jurisdiction. The lack of development in
Your point is not valid! This backward view is known as incrementalism! It basically means Waterford has to develop all the land available in its jurisdiction before it things can happen on the other side of the Suir. It is also invalid as development in that area are over a decade old and some are approaching two decades. What is left is industrial or has access issues. Mount Congreve is not far from there for example. The necessity is so Waterford can focus the market forces to encourage growth in the area.
Kilkenny by their own admission use the area in question as a cash cow. They say 10% of their income is generated in the area yet they are unable to do basic things like provide footpaths. This is the point.Squidvicious wrote: »Ferrybank is not necessarily anything to do with which Council runs it. I suspect that Ferrybank would be no more developed today if you'd had the boundary extension 30 years ago. And Ferrybank did expand to a great degree in the years before the economic crash, again under the jurisdiction of Kilkenny County Council. Remember Councils do not build housing estates. Builders do. There is plenty infrastructure (e.g. water supply etc) in Ferrybank to allow it to expand under KKCC. If people want to move to new estates in Ferrybank, they will do so regardless of which Council runs it. There is no necessity for it all to be under one Council. Isn't Dublin divided into 4 local authorities?
Kilkenny has proven to be incapable of moving away from “Beggar thy neighbour” attitudes hence Ferrybank Shopping Centre, BTW Councils do build housing estates! They are also responsible for managing and implementing land use policies. Kilkenny have been seriously neglectful in that regard. If the area stays in Kilkenny’s control they can potentially obstruct population growth by zoning. Any co-operation that they have provided so far is at the behest of the Dept. of the Environment.Squidvicious wrote: »
As for the bolded bit, come on - surely you have to admit that having only one bridge is a bit of an issue? Have you ever seen the traffic in the morning over there? It's nearly all going in one direction and that's not in the direction of Belview. Ease of access to an area is crucial and having only one bridge is an impediment to Ferrybank's growth. You could say that Ferrybank's problem over the decades has been a chicken and egg one. People were slow to move there because there was a perception that there were no facilities. There were no facilities there because there weren't enough people there(who had access to ample facilities very close by in Waterford anyway).
The chicken and egg thing is just makey uppy stuff! You are trying to use the single bridge as justification for opposition. It isn’t. It is the incrementalism argument! It just makes it more imperative that the growth of the city is managed in a more balanced way so that traffic can be equalized in both directions. It also ignores the fact that there is TWO bridges with plans for a third. The effective management can only be done from a single point in Waterford. The familiarity is there, the local knowledge is there. The cognitive dissonance that is prevalent in the LAP created by KK is NOT there.Squidvicious wrote: »
As Ferrybank expands that problem(lack of facilities) will resolve itself, regardless of which Council runs it.
Jesus Wept! This statement is beyond belief! Yes it will resolve itself with the help of the infrastructure fairy. There has been estates over there for the last thirty years that barely have footpaths going to them.0 -
0 -
fuzzy dunlop wrote: »I really don’t care what you appreciate. I don’t appreciate having to go over the same sh!t over and over again for the benefit of someone who is either too lazy to inform themselves or just plain lying! You ARE embarrassing yourself. You made a ridiculous claim that nobody gave justifiable reason for the extension.
I stand by my point that no convincing argument has been made to show that the extension will make any major difference to Waterford's development. By development, I an principally talking about it's economic development. Will the extension make any difference in terms of job, hospital or educational facilities? No evidence that it will. Will it make any difference to the lives of people in John's Park, Viewmount or Hillview? I can't see that it will.
Banks don’t do planning so that point is moot. Dunnes Stores don’t do planning so that is also not relevant at all. An Bord Pleaneala arbitrate disputes! If there is no objection they will not get involved. So ABP did not endorse it. There was a subterfuge involved in the final application where the application was made, objected too by Waterford, withdrawn and made again. This is how it got through! If Waterford CC had been quicker off the mark and less trusting they would have objected and it would have been undoubtedly objected. Nothing at all to do with ABP
An Bord Pleanala's best known role is not arbitrating disputes. If I apply for planning permission and my application is rejected or if I have made a submission and wish to object to a permission granted by a local authority, I appeal to An Bord Pleanala and they will either approve or reject the planning permission/application. They do not arbitrate in such a situation. They made a decision to grant permission for the shopping centre so it wasn't just KKCC. An Bord Pleanala certainly did make a planning decision and they are an independent body. I'll concede your point on banks. However, Dunnes, while not planners, are good business people who clearly thought that the shopping centre was a runner. AFAIR, Waterford actually did object which is why it went to the Bord.
Using the banks as an endorsement for this is like Jimmy Saville endorsing a kindergarten!
Your point is not valid! This backward view is known as incrementalism! It basically means Waterford has to develop all the land available in its jurisdiction before it things can happen on the other side of the Suir. It is also invalid as development in that area are over a decade old and some are approaching two decades. What is left is industrial or has access issues. Mount Congreve is not far from there for example. The necessity is so Waterford can focus the market forces to encourage growth in the area.
You misunderstand my point. You appear to believe that the sole or main reason for the lack of development in Ferrybank is because it is administered by KKCC. My point is that this area of Waterford city is also relatively undeveloped. Go out Bilberry or Gracedieu road and you reach open country very quickly. Go downriver and it's 3 miles or more before you reach open countryside. There was no Kilkenny bogeyman to stymie development here so clearly other factors are at play. Is it not possible that other factors are at play in Ferrybank too and that it's not solely the fault of KKCC?
Kilkenny by their own admission use the area in question as a cash cow. They say 10% of their income is generated in the area yet they are unable to do basic things like provide footpaths. This is the point.
Kilkenny has proven to be incapable of moving away from “Beggar thy neighbour” attitudes hence Ferrybank Shopping Centre, BTW Councils do build housing estates! They are also responsible for managing and implementing land use policies. Kilkenny have been seriously neglectful in that regard. If the area stays in Kilkenny’s control they can potentially obstruct population growth by zoning. Any co-operation that they have provided so far is at the behest of the Dept. of the Environment.
The days of large scale council house building are long gone. What percentage of housing in the Waterford City area has been built by the Council in the past 30 years? Low single figures, I would imagine. KKCC has zoned large parts of Ferrybank. The infrastructure for house construction is clearly there. If not, how could the large scale house construction that took place in Ferrybank between 200 and 2008 have gone ahead? There is a logical contradiction is your above paragraph. On the one hand, KKCC engage in "beggar thy neighbour" policies. Presumably you mean that they'll permit anything to raise rates. If that's true why would they obstruct development? Surely, they'll facilitate as much development as possible to increase rates? The proof that Ferrybank can develop under KKCC jurisdiction is the large house building that took place between 200 and 2008.
The chicken and egg thing is just makey uppy stuff! You are trying to use the single bridge as justification for opposition. It isn’t. It is the incrementalism argument! It just makes it more imperative that the growth of the city is managed in a more balanced way so that traffic can be equalized in both directions. It also ignores the fact that there is TWO bridges with plans for a third. The effective management can only be done from a single point in Waterford. The familiarity is there, the local knowledge is there. The cognitive dissonance that is prevalent in the LAP created by KK is NOT there.
Plans for a third? If the government really wants growth in Ferrybank, that's the first thing that needs to be done. Extension or not, Ferrybank's focus will be on Waterford for many decades to come. Traffic won't be equalised for decades even in a best case scenario simply because people on the North side will still need to access South side shops, services, workplaces for the foreseeable future. I would concerns have Ferrybank simply can't sustain large scale development without another bridge. The traffic there is horrendous in the mornings. The existing second bridge hasn't relieved congestion on Rice Bridge partly because it's tolled and partly because it's too far upstream to sufficiently influence traffic in the City. It's mainly a by-pass. Proper infrastructural investment is what's needed for the North side of the river to grow not shifting the boundary. The extension is a mere sop instead of the government actually spending money in the area. A boundary extension on it's own will do little or nothing for Waterford.
Jesus Wept! This statement is beyond belief! Yes it will resolve itself with the help of the infrastructure fairy. There has been estates over there for the last thirty years that barely have footpaths going to them.[/QUOTE]
Can you name these estates? It's ironic that you claim that KKCC doesn't maintain the footpaths in Ferrybank when there's currently a thread running denouncing WCC for not maintaining the roads.
There. An entire polite reply without insulting you. Perhaps you can return the favour? Remember, the majority of what we are talking about is opinion. We all have a right to our own opinions even where we may disagree0 -
I have observed the waterford city boundary debate for many years; I read the most recent report of the Local Government Committee and followed through the media the various responses from both sides, so to speak. I have heard nothing, and I mean nothing, of substance in support of not altering the boundary. There is no reason in logic to justify maintaining the status quo. Kilkenny County Council has - through its actions, policies and planning, demonstrated quite clearly that it does not take the idea of cooperation one bit seriously. It has also demonstrated very explicitly that it does not have what it takes to run a large part of an urban entity competently; it has treated Ferrybank shamefully - in planning terms. The place is simply being used as a container for gathering rates. It should be subject to a PrimetIme investigates! What I have heard instead from those opposing the extension is immature rhetoric about culture and the GAA; that's all, there seems to be no more substance than a narrow protectionist reaction based on silly statements and the worst type of gombeenism one could imagine - the lebensraum/ww2 analogies are a disgrace. What I have read on this forum is much more measured, but is based on the same misinformation and prejudice. It's depressing.
In my view, there is a very compelling social, economic, environmental and governance case for a boundary adjustment - to reflect the reality that Waterford city's footprint extends into what is now administered by Kilkenny County Council. By the way, County Councils don't own their territories, they simply administer them on behalf of those people who reside there, so thi stalk about land grabs is nonsense. I don't see any valid reason not to extend that boundary. It's what cities all over the world do when they expand. Grow up Kilkenny, focus your energies on the city you have got right (Kilkenny - which is a model of good planning), and allow Waterford city develop and plan its own urban area, properly.0 -
Might a better solution not be to amalgamate Waterford and Kilkenny local authorities?0
-
I have observed the waterford city boundary debate for many years; I read the most recent report of the Local Government Committee and followed through the media the various responses from both sides, so to speak. I have heard nothing, and I mean nothing, of substance in support of not altering the boundary. There is no reason in logic to justify maintaining the status quo. Kilkenny County Council has - through its actions, policies and planning, demonstrated quite clearly that it does not take the idea of cooperation one bit seriously. It has also demonstrated very explicitly that it does not have what it takes to run a large part of an urban entity competently; it has treated Ferrybank shamefully - in planning terms. The place is simply being used as a container for gathering rates. It should be subject to a PrimetIme investigates! What I have heard instead from those opposing the extension is immature rhetoric about culture and the GAA; that's all, there seems to be no more substance than a narrow protectionist reaction based on silly statements and the worst type of gombeenism one could imagine - the lebensraum/ww2 analogies are a disgrace. What I have read on this forum is much more measured, but is based on the same misinformation and prejudice. It's depressing.
In my view, there is a very compelling social, economic, environmental and governance case for a boundary adjustment - to reflect the reality that Waterford city's footprint extends into what is now administered by Kilkenny County Council. By the way, County Councils don't own their territories, they simply administer them on behalf of those people who reside there, so thi stalk about land grabs is nonsense. I don't see any valid reason not to extend that boundary. It's what cities all over the world do when they expand. Grow up Kilkenny, focus your energies on the city you have got right (Kilkenny - which is a model of good planning), and allow Waterford city develop and plan its own urban area, properly.
If you want change, the person arguing for it has got to make the case . What would Waterford do differently in Ferrybank if there is an extension?
As for the social and economic case, I've said before that I would have more sympathy for the proposal had it been an extension into the old Waterford City Council - at least the old Waterford city was a coherent entity as opposed to a county which extends from Ferrybank to Youghal bridge. As I've said before, if you really think that boundaries need changing, then do it properly and have a rational redesign of county boundaries on a countrywide basis to reflect economic and social realities rather than just moving a border a few fields in one direction.0 -
Squidvicious wrote: »If you want change, the person arguing for it has got to make the case . What would Waterford do differently in Ferrybank if there is an extension?
As for the social and economic case, I've said before that I would have more sympathy for the proposal had it been an extension into the old Waterford City Council - at least the old Waterford city was a coherent entity as opposed to a county which extends from Ferrybank to Youghal bridge. As I've said before, if you really think that boundaries need changing, then do it properly and have a rational redesign of county boundaries on a countrywide basis to reflect economic and social realities rather than just moving a border a few fields in one direction.
So if countrywide boundary extensions took place you'd be happy, but if it's only Waterfords boundary extending into Kilkenny you're upset? That's fairly pathetic. You think you're suffering from this so you adopt the attitude 'If we have to suffer everyone else should too'.0 -
Squidvicious wrote: »If you want change, the person arguing for it has got to make the case . What would Waterford do differently in Ferrybank if there is an extension?
The arguments have been made by the boundary commission.
The case has been made.
If you have an opposing view then critique its reasons for the boundary change.0 -
Advertisement
-
Squidvicious wrote: »If you want change, the person arguing for it has got to make the case . What would Waterford do differently in Ferrybank if there is an extension?
As for the social and economic case, I've said before that I would have more sympathy for the proposal had it been an extension into the old Waterford City Council - at least the old Waterford city was a coherent entity as opposed to a county which extends from Ferrybank to Youghal bridge. As I've said before, if you really think that boundaries need changing, then do it properly and have a rational redesign of county boundaries on a countrywide basis to reflect economic and social realities rather than just moving a border a few fields in one direction.
I'm sorry, but your deflection is shallow and pointless. And is just a deflection. Read the report - it makes a very strong, unambiguous case based on a wide range of socio-economic and environmental criteria. The view is based on best practice in terms of how cities are governed worldwide. A city that is fragmented like this is effectively being governed by two local authorities with very different agendas. This patently has not worked; Ferrybank as an urban entity is a failure in planning terms. The shopping centre is a living testament to the disregard that Kilkenny County Council has for city planning and for Waterford - it was a deliberate attempt to sabotage the city centre.
The report was very clear - that a boundary extension is warranted. This is known as 'evidence-based public policy'. I have yet to hear any convincing rational rebuttal of that proposal. All I have heard, aside from the childish rubbish, is -''prove things will be better for xxx living up in xxx''. Unfortunately, public policy doesn't work like that. It's time for a mature decision making process.0 -
longshanks wrote: »So if countrywide boundary extensions took place you'd be happy, but if it's only Waterfords boundary extending into Kilkenny you're upset? That's fairly pathetic. You think you're suffering from this so you adopt the attitude 'If we have to suffer everyone else should too'.
A rational reorganisation of boundaries does not necessarily involve any suffering. I see no suffering in having amalgamations of counties if that makes economic sense. Reducing the number of counties(e.g. one for the South-East) would save a considerable amount of money. Alternatively, arrange councils around the nearest main town as in the North.0 -
I'm sorry, but your deflection is shallow and pointless. And is just a deflection. Read the report - it makes a very strong, unambiguous case based on a wide range of socio-economic and environmental criteria. The view is based on best practice in terms of how cities are governed worldwide. A city that is fragmented like this is effectively being governed by two local authorities with very different agendas. This patently has not worked; Ferrybank as an urban entity is a failure in planning terms. The shopping centre is a living testament to the disregard that Kilkenny County Council has for city planning and for Waterford - it was a deliberate attempt to sabotage the city centre.
The report was very clear - that a boundary extension is warranted. This is known as 'evidence-based public policy'. I have yet to hear any convincing rational rebuttal of that proposal. All I have heard, aside from the childish rubbish, is -''prove things will be better for xxx living up in xxx''. Unfortunately, public policy doesn't work like that. It's time for a mature decision making process.
I've read the report. Can you point out to me where it specifically outlines the benefits or advantages? I see one or two parts saying that Waterford would doubtless benefit from the extension but no proper detailed reasoning to back this up. Indeed, it notes that much of the reason for the relative lack of North side development is historic with no proper bridge for vehicular traffic in place until the early 20th century, rather than blaming Kilkenny Co.Co..
As for deliberate sabotage, that's paranoia. At worst, it was possibly irresponsible to potentially weaken Waterford city's retail structure. But deliberate sabotage? Why would Kilkenny want to do this.0 -
Squidvicious wrote: ».
As for deliberate sabotage, that's paranoia. At worst, it was possibly irresponsible to potentially weaken Waterford city's retail structure. But deliberate sabotage? Why would Kilkenny want to do this.
If your asking this..it shows just how out of touch with reality you are!!0 -
Is there a date for this report to be acted upon or dismissed?0
-
So, I take it all the Waterford and Kilkenny people here are in favour of an amalgamation of both local authorities?0
-
Advertisement
-
-
It can be called the Three Rivers Authority and based in Waterford of course
0 -
-
Squidvicious wrote: »A rational reorganisation of boundaries does not necessarily involve any suffering. I see no suffering in having amalgamations of counties if that makes economic sense. Reducing the number of counties(e.g. one for the South-East) would save a considerable amount of money. Alternatively, arrange councils around the nearest main town as in the North.
You're talking bollox. You know it too.0 -
longshanks wrote:You're talking bollox. You know it too.
It's not bollox at all really. Why wouldn't you amalgamate two or three smallish counties?0 -
Advertisement
-
Johnboy1951 wrote: »Squidvicious wrote: »If you want change, the person arguing for it has got to make the case . What would Waterford do differently in Ferrybank if there is an extension?
The arguments have been made by the boundary commission.
The case has been made.
If you have an opposing view then critique its reasons for the boundary change.
This guy has no grasp on reality. Here he goes again with his "What would Waterford do differently?" It doesn't matter how many times that you tell him there is a huge shopping centre there empty for the last ten years which should never have been built along with the plethora of other issues. He still comes along and makes statements to the extent that nobody has been able to argue the case for it. We all have witnessed people speaking without thinking. But this is a whole new level of brain disengagement.0 -
-
Max Powers wrote: »Kind of is bollix because that is not being discussed and not on the cards either.
My point is that I don't believe that the boundary extension will make any huge difference to Waterford. Amalgamations might, if only from a cost saving point of view. But I accept that amalgamations are probably never going to happen and aren't on the agenda.
I've read the boundary report and I can't recall any concrete benefits being put forward for the extension. It is suggested here that towns and cities need to be under one authority and that this is the norm internationally. Yet Dublin is divided in 4. Cork manages to limp along when it's urban area is divided between County and City. The other boundary reports recommended no change for Carlow or Athlone. Now I know that each town/city is different. But these facts suggest that the need for a boundary extension in Waterford is not half as clear cut as is made out here. It's not needed in other areas so, at the very least, it may not be needed here either. At most, an extension will lead to more housing on the North side of the river than would otherwise be the case. I fail to see how it makes a real difference to people's lives whether the next big housing estate is in Newrath or Gracedieu.
On the other hand, I've got to concede that there are no compelling reasons against the extension either. Funnily enough, I don't remember anyone making that point, though perhaps the point has been made previously on what is now a very long thread. I mean, we can't really say that our lives will be worse off under Waterford CC either. Identity? It does annoy me that this is entirely dismissed and even derided. If Tallow or Lismore were being transferred to Cork, people down there would be against it. Most of us feel some allegiance to our county. Is it really so hard to understand and respect our wish to remain part of Kilkenny which we regard as our county? By the same token, I have to accept that the identity argument isn't a slam dunk against the extension either. For one thing, there could well be a majority in favour in the affected area. You've been sending over planters and colonists for decades(before anyone goes nuts, that a joke, okay;)). Identity ought to be considered but it's one of many factors and isn't a trump card either way.
The shopping centre keeps coming up. It would be naïve to suggest that rates/development charges were not to some degree on the minds of KKCC when it approved the application. However, Ferrybank was growing at the time. Is it not possible that it was approved because of future growth projections for Ferrybank and as a way of stimulating further growth in the area? After all, that's what you want, isn't it, growth in Ferrybank? Or is it that you only want growth in Ferrybank if it's recognised as part of Waterford? As I've said before, an independent body, An Bord Pleanala, approved the application. In hindsight, it was a mistake but An Bord Pleanala didn't think so at the time.
I accept that I'm biased and looking at the matter with Black and Amber eyes. I ask for good reasons for the extension but I accept that I'd probably need something fairly miraculous to concede and say I support the move;). But you all need to recognise that you're all looking at the matter with Blue and White glasses so maybe you should think about it again and consider whether the extension will make any real difference.
My prediction? There will be a lot more housing in Ferrybank in the coming decades. Probably a bit more if it's part of Waterford. But it will make very little difference if any to most of us. It's a bureaucratic tidy-up exercise and little more.0 -
You're from Limerick, if I'm correct. Has the extension into Clare changed things much up there? Just to be clear, that's not a trick question. I know that you're in favour of a boundary extension down here(even if you're a neutral) but any effects from the Limerick extension might shed a bit of light on the debate here. And if you can't think of any, I don't think that necessarily means anything either way either! I know that none of us are urban planners so the fact that we don't spot these things doesn't mean they're not there!It's not bollox at all really. Why wouldn't you amalgamate two or three smallish counties?0 -
Squidvicious wrote: »You're from Limerick, if I'm correct. Has the extension into Clare changed things much up there? Just to be clear, that's not a trick question. I know that you're in favour of a boundary extension down here(even if you're a neutral) but any effects from the Limerick extension might shed a bit of light on the debate here. And if you can't think of any, I don't think that necessarily means anything either way either! I know that none of us are urban planners so the fact that we don't spot these things doesn't mean they're not there!
Yes, I am from Limerick. There is a large section of the northern part of the city (poulation 5000 or so) that is in Clare. It's still inClare, by the way. The extension was not granted because the Commission reckoned it was politically untenable to do so (it was the GAA argument). It's ****ty for the residents there because they have to deal with Clare County Council (based in Ennis about 25 miles away) for various services. Interestingly this section of Clare actually votes in the Limerick City Dail constituency (which makes sense) and they vote in the Ireland South Euro constituency (Clare is part of Ireland West). But I don't thnk the issue is as serious as it is in Waterford. There is no major industry in the area, no big retail centres and no important institutions such as hospitals, schools or colleges.
I was in favour of a boundary extension in Limerick and Waterford, but I've come round to thinking that it's a case of barking up the wrong tree. I think the extension is right in the sense that it makes absolutely no sense that a single urban area would have two local authorities over it. We had a situation in Limerick until 2014 where we had both the city and county councils in a tug of war situation, each overseeing what is effectively urban Limerick. It was a truly devastating situation. So many of the city's problems can be linked strongly to this. Since the 1950's the County Council had piggybacked on the economic driver that is Limerick City and encouraged very damaging peripheral development. It led to a lot of sprawl, major car dependency, the near death of the city centre and all the huge economic and social problems that go with these things. That administrative situation has been solved since the amalgamation in 2014, but it will take decades to fix things.
I think, in the great scheme of things, amalgamations of the local authorities makes far more sense than simply shifting boundaries. I don't say this because of the obvious financial savings and efficiencies that would accrue. Those would be benefits but they are incidental. The major advantage is that you would have a single authority, with a single plan overseeing a distinct economic region with a defined urban driver. That is massive. It would put these regions on a very strong footing not only in an Irish context but in a European one too. So, in summary, a biundary extension would be somewhat good for Waterford, but the amalgamation of the counties would be massively beneficial for the whole region.0 -
That is an interesting perspective. I can't say that I know Limerick terribly well but would have visited occasionally down the years. On recent visits, I have found the city centre very vibrant. This was not so much the case in the past which fits your description of the county council allowing too much suburban development which may have caused the doughnut effect on Limerick which you seem to me to be describing. That didn't really happen in Waterford. In theory, it could be because Waterford County Council was more responsible. More likely is that Limerick city grew much more in to Limerick County than Waterford city grew in to Waterford County so it wasn't really an option for Waterford County Council to do what Limerick County Council did. The 1980(?) boundary extension into Waterford County was big enough to ensure that that didn't happen in Waterford. The fear of "doughnutting" was what infuriated Waterford about the Ferrybank shopping centre. Undoubtedly, it was too big and KKCC granting permission was fuelled by a genuine desire to develop Ferrybank, delight at the rates they would receive and a lack of concern at possible ill effects on Waterford(but NOT sabotage - very few of us are that Machiavellian, no more than Limerick County Council wanted to damage Limerick city).Yes, I am from Limerick. There is a large section of the northern part of the city (poulation 5000 or so) that is in Clare. It's still inClare, by the way. The extension was not granted because the Commission reckoned it was politically untenable to do so (it was the GAA argument). It's ****ty for the residents there because they have to deal with Clare County Council (based in Ennis about 25 miles away) for various services. Interestingly this section of Clare actually votes in the Limerick City Dail constituency (which makes sense) and they vote in the Ireland South Euro constituency (Clare is part of Ireland West). But I don't thnk the issue is as serious as it is in Waterford. There is no major industry in the area, no big retail centres and no important institutions such as hospitals, schools or colleges.
I was in favour of a boundary extension in Limerick and Waterford, but I've come round to thinking that it's a case of barking up the wrong tree. I think the extension is right in the sense that it makes absolutely no sense that a single urban area would have two local authorities over it. We had a situation in Limerick until 2014 where we had both the city and county councils in a tug of war situation, each overseeing what is effectively urban Limerick. It was a truly devastating situation. So many of the city's problems can be linked strongly to this. Since the 1950's the County Council had piggybacked on the economic driver that is Limerick City and encouraged very damaging peripheral development. It led to a lot of sprawl, major car dependency, the near death of the city centre and all the huge economic and social problems that go with these things. That administrative situation has been solved since the amalgamation in 2014, but it will take decades to fix things.
I think, in the great scheme of things, amalgamations of the local authorities makes far more sense than simply shifting boundaries. I don't say this because of the obvious financial savings and efficiencies that would accrue. Those would be benefits but they are incidental. The major advantage is that you would have a single authority, with a single plan overseeing a distinct economic region with a defined urban driver. That is massive. It would put these regions on a very strong footing not only in an Irish context but in a European one too. So, in summary, a biundary extension would be somewhat good for Waterford, but the amalgamation of the counties would be massively beneficial for the whole region.
However, the amalgamation of Limerick city and county is a far better fit than the amalgamation of Waterford city and council. Limerick is the undisputed centre and capital of the county. However, Waterford is quite split along East/West lines with Dungarvan being joint county capital. Waterford sees itself as the capital of the South East with good reason. However, if I was in Kilkenny or Wexford, I could be forgiven for saying capital of the South East? Waterford city isn't even the capital of its own county. Waterford city's natural hinterland is county Waterford as far as perhaps kilmacthomas and south Kilkenny as far as perhaps Ballyhale and Mooncoin. It's a shame that a administrative area on those lines could not be constructed as that would probably fit most closely with the area's economic and social configuration. I accept that's extremely unlikely to ever happen!
Then again, you should probably ignore me as I talk bollocks, am embarrassing myself and am detached from reality 😜0 -
On a different note, I did have a sinking feeling before ever the report was published when I saw the members of the boundary committee. They were all Limerick based or had Limerick connections. It might be cynical to suggest that they were hand picked but coming from Limerick, they were bound to be sympathetic to Waterford's concerns. If only we could have had people from Clare or Roscommon 😀0
-
Squidvicious wrote:On a different note, I did have a sinking feeling before ever the report was published when I saw the members of the boundary committee. They were all Limerick based or had Limerick connections. It might be cynical to suggest that they were hand picked but coming from Limerick, they were bound to be sympathetic to Waterford's concerns. If only we could have had people from Clare or Roscommon 😀
Interesting! Who are the members of the committee?0 -
-
As an outsider I find this childish sniping about a boundary extension ridiculous and pathetic. It's like two 5 year old kids fighting over a toy fire engine in the playroom. Are adjacent counties in a small country really all that different? Come on!
As a person with expertise in urban geography and urban planning, it's depressing. Waterford should have expended its boundary into Kilkenny decades ago. The city needs balanced development on both sides of the Suir and the people of Ferrybank have been badly let down by Kilkenny County Council. Where are their voices in this "debate?"
The boundary extension is a no-brainier. Actually it would be better if Kilkenny, Waterford and Wexford were merged into one single entity but that just won't happen.0 -
Advertisement
-
JupiterKid wrote: »As an outsider I find this childish sniping about a boundary extension ridiculous and pathetic. It's like two 5 year old kids fighting over a toy fire engine in the playroom. Are adjacent counties in a small country really all that different? Come on!
As a person with expertise in urban geography and urban planning, it's depressing. Waterford should have expended its boundary into Kilkenny decades ago. The city needs balanced development on both sides of the Suir and the people of Ferrybank have been badly let down by Kilkenny County Council. Where are their voices in this "debate?"
The boundary extension is a no-brainier. Actually it would be better if Kilkenny, Waterford and Wexford were merged into one single entity but that just won't happen.
Well, I'll defer to your knowledge in the urban planning area but as a resident(one of those voices that you say should be heard), I don't see that it will make a whole lot of difference to our lives one way or another - lots of other towns and cities seem to manage just fine split between different councils e.g. Cork. As a resident in Ferrybank, I do not feel let down by KKCC and the stories about neglected estates in Ferrybank is something that I'm simply not familiar with as a resident. As I've said before, however, I do accept that there's no major argument AGAINST the extension either. Indeed, it would be a logical contradiction if I said on the one hand that a boundary extension won't change things hugely while simultaneously arguing that maintaining the status quo would be a better option.
Coveney(probably the next FG leader) released a statement over Christmas that he wanted to see Waterford expand and on both sides of the river. The point that I'm trying to make is that simply saying that you want Waterford to expand or that you want it to expand on the North side really isn't the point. If you really want to develop Ferrybank, the first thing that you need to do is to put in a second bridge. If you want to expand Waterford, stop slicing away at the hospital and upgrade the IT to a university(or even better, give Waterford a greenfield university and let the IT stay as it is). Try to direct foreign investment to Waterford(though I accept that multinationals invest where they want to invest and not necessarily where the IDA tells them to go). If Coveney is serious about expanding Waterford, the boundary extension ought to be only a very small appetiser to the main course of proper investment in Waterford. My fear for Waterford would be that when Waterford looks for more investment after the extension(if it happens) it will be told to "feck off, lads, didn't we give you your boundary extension?".
Before anyone jumps down my throat 'cos there's been a bit of that(good morning, fuzzy Dunlop!!), I accept that the above is not DIRECTLY relevant to the question of whether there ought to be a boundary extension or not. I'm just trying to bring a little (in my view) reality to matters. By all means have the extension if you must - I'm a biased Co. Kilkenny man and in my perverse way, I'd prefer that it didn't go ahead, but I can't really say that there are any good economic or other arguments against it. But it's just not going to be a game changer for Waterford by any means, contrary to what some people think. Waterford has far bigger issues facing it.0 -
OK, from a Ferrybank residences point of view there is no 'real' reason for not expanding the boundary. I also accept there is no compelling reason to do so in your experience. Nevertheless planners (who are supposed to know about these things) say it is the correct thing to do. Fair enough.
On the other points, particularly about the second bridge, it is planned, but I have a feeling (unfounded) that without the boundary extension it will not happen any time soon.
The bridge would also make the hospital more accessible to the region and would encourage further investment. The second bridge would be quite close to Ardkeen, and linked via an outer bypass to the motorway/Cork road.
The Uni status claim would also be bolstered, and IF it ever came to fruition would help greatly in the region (not just Waterford) to allow the less well-off to access third level education reasonably locally.
Most investment (manufacturing/services) would look a lot more favourably on a region that has a Uni and good and clear access to all facilities, and of course a highly educated pool of labour.
Without the boundary extension the rest might not fail completely, but it surely would hinder development in many areas.0 -
Squid, I think you are really underestimating just how important to a city or region is the structure of its administration. At best, having two local authorities in a tug of war with each other over what is a single urban/economic area really makes no sense, and at worst it leads to fairly devastating consequences (such as in Limerick). The GAA argument really shouldn't come into this. Why are GAA teams aligned by county in any case? If the extension goes ahead there's nothing stopping anybody in Ferrybank continuing to play or shout for Kilkenny, is there?0
-
Squid, I think you are really underestimating just how important to a city or region is the structure of its administration. At best, having two local authorities in a tug of war with each other over what is a single urban/economic area really makes no sense, and at worst it leads to fairly devastating consequences (such as in Limerick). The GAA argument really shouldn't come into this. Why are GAA teams aligned by county in any case? If the extension goes ahead there's nothing stopping anybody in Ferrybank continuing to play or shout for Kilkenny, is there?
Perhaps I am. As I say, I'm pretty biased on this one;)
I am a member of a Countywide(Kilkenny) organisation(not GAA). Not sure if I can really remain as such after the extension. As for GAA, I'm not sure that we really can shout for Kilkenny. We won't be part of Co. Kilkenny anymore, will we? Perhaps some recognition that the area remains technically Kilkenny could be arranged but I really can't see it happening. But I do agree that the above can't stop the extension if there's good reason for it.0 -
Squidvicious wrote: »Perhaps I am. As I say, I'm pretty biased on this one;)
I am a member of a Countywide(Kilkenny) organisation(not GAA). Not sure if I can really remain as such after the extension. As for GAA, I'm not sure that we really can shout for Kilkenny. We won't be part of Co. Kilkenny anymore, will we? Perhaps some recognition that the area remains technically Kilkenny could be arranged but I really can't see it happening. But I do agree that the above can't stop the extension if there's good reason for it.
If you moved residence to Wexford or Waterford would that make a difference?
Would you not still be from Kilkenny and have Kilkenny interests?
I see little difference there TBH. So your residence will be in Waterford, but you are still from Kilkenny.0 -
Johnboy1951 wrote: »OK, from a Ferrybank residences point of view there is no 'real' reason for not expanding the boundary. I also accept there is no compelling reason to do so in your experience. Nevertheless planners (who are supposed to know about these things) say it is the correct thing to do. Fair enough.
On the other points, particularly about the second bridge, it is planned, but I have a feeling (unfounded) that without the boundary extension it will not happen any time soon.
The bridge would also make the hospital more accessible to the region and would encourage further investment. The second bridge would be quite close to Ardkeen, and linked via an outer bypass to the motorway/Cork road.
The Uni status claim would also be bolstered, and IF it ever came to fruition would help greatly in the region (not just Waterford) to allow the less well-off to access third level education reasonably locally.
Most investment (manufacturing/services) would look a lot more favourably on a region that has a Uni and good and clear access to all facilities, and of course a highly educated pool of labour.
Without the boundary extension the rest might not fail completely, but it surely would hinder development in many areas.
There may be something in what you say, I will grudgingly accept:P, though I do think that accusations of Kilkenny hamstringing development in the past are exaggerated.
As I've said to Zulu, I'm black and amber biased! One thing that we can probably/possibly all agree on, however, is that if Waterford is to expand, it badly needs more investment and that the boundary extension alone will not be enough by a long chalk.0 -
Squidvicious wrote: »There may be something in what you say, I will grudgingly accept:P, though I do think that accusations of Kilkenny hamstringing development in the past are exaggerated.
As I've said to Zulu, I'm black and amber biased! One thing that we can probably/possibly all agree on, however, is that if Waterford is to expand, it badly needs more investment and that the boundary extension alone will not be enough by a long chalk.
I agree completely, but would add that the boundary extension is probably the cornerstone of future plans and investment opportunities.
While admittedly the major portion of the benefit would accrue to Waterford city and immediate surrounds, it would also be of benefit to the region as a whole.0 -
I think Kilkenny folks, instead of reaching for the pitchforks in the thatch, should perhaps start arguing for a better alternative that will also benefit Kilkenny, and that would of course be an amalgamation of both counties!
Now, you say that a boundary extension won't be enough but this suggests that you see it as simply a redrawing of lines on a map, and I think you are really underestimating the importance of having a good administrative structure. A boundary extension would lead to far more efficient and sensible planning of the city, and that in turn would lead to investment, infrastructure, etc. That is, it's an enabler. It's universally acknowledged that when the 5 burroughs of New York were brought under the one authority in the late 1800's that this enabled the huge subsequent development of the city. There were very significant other factors too, of course, but the expansion could not have happened to the same degree if those 5 burroughs were continuing to compete with each other. Of course, there was huge resistance back then too. People couldn't see how it would change anything and vested interests fought against it. Now, with the benefit of hindsight we can see just how important that decision was. Indeed, the history of NYC is generally written in the context of pre and post 1898, such was the dramatic change that occurred from that year onwards.0 -
Johnboy1951 wrote: »I agree completely, but would add that the boundary extension is probably the cornerstone of future plans and investment opportunities.
While admittedly the major portion of the benefit would accrue to Waterford city and immediate surrounds, it would also be of benefit to the region as a whole.
Only time will really settle that one. Of course, you may be right but I think that it's also possible that you're overestimating the extension's importance. We'll have to come back to this, say, ten years in the future and see who's right!0 -
Advertisement
-
I think Kilkenny folks, instead of reaching for the pitchforks in the thatch, should perhaps start arguing for a better alternative that will also benefit Kilkenny, and that would of course be an amalgamation of both counties!
Now, you say that a boundary extension won't be enough but this suggests that you see it as simply a redrawing of lines on a map, and I think you are really underestimating the importance of having a good administrative structure. A boundary extension would lead to far more efficient and sensible planning of the city, and that in turn would lead to investment, infrastructure, etc. That is, it's an enabler. It's universally acknowledged that when the 5 burroughs of New York were brought under the one authority in the late 1800's that this enabled the huge subsequent development of the city. There were very significant other factors too, of course, but the expansion could not have happened to the same degree if those 5 burroughs were continuing to compete with each other. Of course, there was huge resistance back then too. People couldn't see how it would change anything and vested interests fought against it. Now, with the benefit of hindsight we can see just how important that decision was. Indeed, the history of NYC is generally written in the context of pre and post 1898, such was the dramatic change that occurred from that year onwards.
We'll keep those pitchforks, thank you very much. Sure, won't they be needed to repel the Deise invasion forces;)?
I'm in favour of an amalgamation, preferably with Wexford and South Tipp added in too. That's not on the agenda, however. Let's face it, nothing like that's going to happen in Ireland.0 -
Squidvicious wrote: »I'm in favour of an amalgamation, preferably with Wexford and South Tipp added in too. That's not on the agenda, however. Let's face it, nothing like that's going to happen in Ireland.
It's like saying I won't vote for the party I like best because they won't win. It's a fundamentally flawed logic!
If we don't look for an amalgamation then we sure as hell won't get it.0 -
Why this boundary extension was not done in 1977 or 1987 I cannot fathom. Was it ever sought back then? I mean Galway city hugely extended its boundaries in the late 1980s and to this day, despite massive growth since, the entire built up area of the city lies within its boundaries.
ALL Irish cities should have adequate boundaries that reflect the built up area of the city. Some would argue that the functional region of cities (the commuting hinterlands) should be included too. It means urban governance is co-ordinated and targeted and delivered in a strategic, coherent way. Having multiple competing authorities governing a city is a recipe for disaster.
But I agree that Waterford needs more than a boundary extension to successfully compete. Adequate infrastructural resources are required such as a third river bridge, clarity on the role and status of the regional hospital and full university status for WIT, with a dedicated innovation centre that can develop synergies with hi tech/bio pharma companies.
The boundary extension is only a start. Waterford needs investment. It is a very small city and needs to grow significantly if it is to develop the critical mass to be a real regional centre.0 -
JupiterKid wrote: »Why this boundary extension was not done in 1977 or 1987 I cannot fathom. Was it ever sought back then? I mean Galway city hugely extended its boundaries in the late 1980s and to this day, despite massive growth since, the entire built up area of the city lies within its boundaries.
ALL Irish cities should have adequate boundaries that reflect the built up area of the city. Some would argue that the functional region of cities (the commuting hinterlands) should be included too. It means urban governance is co-ordinated and targeted and delivered in a strategic, coherent way. Having multiple competing authorities governing a city is a recipe for disaster.
But I agree that Waterford needs more than a boundary extension to successfully compete. Adequate infrastructural resources are required such as a third river bridge, clarity on the role and status of the regional hospital and full university status for WIT, with a dedicated innovation centre that can develop synergies with hi tech/bio pharma companies.
The boundary extension is only a start. Waterford needs investment. It is a very small city and needs to grow significantly if it is to develop the critical mass to be a real regional centre.
As I've said before, I think that Waterford has real issues in this regard, extension or not. It remains to be seen how the County/City merger will work out but, at the very least, there's a risk that there will be competition for investment between West and East in Co. Waterford and this tension is underlined by the fact that Dungarvan and Waterford City are joint "capitals" of the county.
As regards its status as regional centre, Waterford is different to the likes of Galway, Cork and Limerick in so far as those cities have no real completion for status as regional centres and have significantly larger county populations also than Co.Waterford. Waterford is the largest city in the South-East and geographically quite central so it is the logical choice to be the regional centre. However, it's not as far ahead of its local "rivals" Wexford or Kilkenny in population terms as the likes of Cork or Galway are and Co. Waterford itself is not much bigger population wise than Co.Kilkenny and is smaller than Co. Wexford. These factors have tended to weaken its status as regional centre.
To my mind, the only solution is proper cooperation throughout the South-East which we haven't been good at in the past. Which is unfortunate because everyone in the South-East loses out to a greater or lesser extent. Co-operation would necessitate some sharing of investment which might not be popular, though.0 -
JupiterKid wrote: »Why this boundary extension was not done in 1977 or 1987 I cannot fathom. Was it ever sought back then? I mean Galway city hugely extended its boundaries in the late 1980s and to this day, despite massive growth since, the entire built up area of the city lies within its boundaries.
ALL Irish cities should have adequate boundaries that reflect the built up area of the city. Some would argue that the functional region of cities (the commuting hinterlands) should be included too. It means urban governance is co-ordinated and targeted and delivered in a strategic, coherent way. Having multiple competing authorities governing a city is a recipe for disaster.
While I agree with your points, in general, it is worth looking at the development of Galway since the 1980's. The boundary extension no doubt facilitated the large growth the city has experienced. But, truth be told, the growth of Galway has not been very well planned in spite of the fact that the city has been under one authority. It is a bit of a mess of a city now, car dependent and choking on traffic and further growth is going to be difficult without colossal spending on infrastructure. This would not have been the case if a bit of thought had gone in to planning the place in the last 30 years. So, what I am saying is, is that while it is important that a city have just one local authority, this does not mean that very unsustainable development won't happen.0 -
While I agree with your points, in general, it is worth looking at the development of Galway since the 1980's. The boundary extension no doubt facilitated the large growth the city has experienced. But, truth be told, the growth of Galway has not been very well planned in spite of the fact that the city has been under one authority. It is a bit of a mess of a city now, car dependent and choking on traffic and further growth is going to be difficult without colossal spending on infrastructure. This would not have been the case if a bit of thought had gone in to planning the place in the last 30 years. So, what I am saying is, is that while it is important that a city have just one local authority, this does not mean that very unsustainable development won't happen.
Which might add a little bit of weight to my belief that the extension will make little difference one way or another. I do accept that a reasonable riposte to that would be that a unitary authority might give a much better potential for good planning and that it would be up to the Council in question to grab the opportunity.0 -
Advertisement
-
I don't think one could conclude that it wouldn't make a difference. The extension in Galway did enable the growth after all. But it's worth pointing out that it was very unsustainable, poorly planned growth, which in the long run does more damage to a city. If I was living on the Ferrybank side of the Suir I would be looking for assurances that the same mistakes that were made in Galway would not be made in Waterford.0
-
"If I was living on the Ferrybank side of the Suir I would be looking for assurances that the same mistakes that were made in Galway would not be made in Waterford".
Waterford Council should be holding town hall meetings to both explain what the benefits would be to Ferrybank residents and how it ties in for the development of the city as a whole. They can't just assume that the advantages are self-evident, they have to show they have some sort of plan!
Also, the Council need to listen to the residents concerns and address them. Too often in Limerick, the City/County Council have used these town hall meetings as a form of window dressing (if they held them at all) and plough ahead with their original intentions.0 -
Exile on Grafton St. wrote: »"If I was living on the Ferrybank side of the Suir I would be looking for assurances that the same mistakes that were made in Galway would not be made in Waterford".
Waterford Council should be holding town hall meetings to both explain what the benefits would be to Ferrybank residents and how it ties in for the development of the city as a whole. They can't just assume that the advantages are self-evident, they have to show they have some sort of plan!
Also, the Council need to listen to the residents concerns and address them. Too often in Limerick, the City/County Council have used these town hall meetings as a form of window dressing (if they held them at all) and plough ahead with their original intentions.
I agree with this 100%. To listen to some posters(not in the last couple of pages admittedly), you would think that KKCC were operating some sort of mini-Aleppo in Ferrybank while Waterford was a type of Switzerland. If there is an extension, I would hope that WCC would do exactly what you are suggesting and come up with a coherent plan. However, my point or fear all along has been that the extension will make little difference either way. Very valid points have been made by Zulu, Johnboy and Jupiter Kid, but if they're to be proven right, it is essential that WCC develops a coherent plan and also gets the funds to make good on that plan. A person's views on the extension may simply depend partly on whether they're an optimist or a pessimist! I'm clearly the latter;). With a coherent plan, WCC might even convince me! I would suspect, though, that WCC would be wary of public meetings as there is a high level of opposition from many quarters.0 -
Some interesting observations. The case for a boundary extension has been made by the Local Government Committee, and is based on what I would consider to be a rational assessment of governance needs in the Waterford region. Those opposing the boundary extension have not really engaged very well with these issues, and have instead tended to rely on whataboutery and silly childish quips rooted in localism and parochial tendencies. Some of this has been disheartening, but not surprising; this has happened before.
It has been suggested here that if Waterford has in fact got a plan for the city region, then it should present it publicly so that the concerned commentators can be persuaded. Sorry, but this is nonsense; the fact of the matter is that Waterford has no jurisdiction over this region - because of the boundary being located where it is. It does not have the capacity in legal or technical terms to make a plan for the region. Even though Kilkenny County Council is the authority responsible for much of this area, it has not shown that it has any plan or vision for the area that recognises its urban credentials- beyond a Local Area Plan that has no functional relationship with the city to which it adjoins.
Some have suggested that the way forward for the city region is cooperation! I am sorry but the horse has bolted on that one. The local authorities involved have demonstrated clearly that cooperation is simply not a realistic option, and that the relationship is based on competition rather than cooperation. Waterford was the only city not to have an agreed Retail Strategy - guess why not? By the way, this notion that Kilkenny County Council's decision to permit Ferrybank shopping Centre (Exhibit A in the case for a boundary extension) was not a decisive and irresponsible act is delusional. It was not simply an attempt to provide for the shopping needs of a suburban area of a few thousand people - it is a Regional scale District centre (37,000 square metres in scale)- aimed at a very large regional catchment. This was done in the full knowledge of its potential impact on the city centre; I cannot see how that can be interpreted as benign - it was predatory as an economic intervention - and in my mind a deliberate and cynical attempt to sabotage Waterford's regeneration aspirations. Why would Waterford City Council, the then New Ross and Carrick on Suir Town Councils, as well as Wexford and Waterford chambers' of Commerce have objected?
For information, as I understand it, An Bord Pleanala did not adjudicate on the permitted development in Ferrybank - Kilkenny County Council decided that one all on their own; the appeal appears to have been withdrawn and there are no reports of file for this decision. They did make a refusal on an earlier application on the same site. In it the Inspector noted the following;
"I conclude that the proposed development is grossly excessive, in scale and extent of floorspace, to serve the local needs of the developing northern suburbs of Waterford City. In addition, I conclude that the convenience content of the development is excessive, and would have a detrimental impact on the town centres of New Ross and Carrick-on-Suir, and that the comparison content of the proposed development, because of its excessive scale and nature, would be likely to impact adversely on the vibrancy and vitality of Waterford city centre, in contravention of the provisions of the Environs Development Plan and of the principles and purpose of the Retail Planning Guidelines. I also consider that the urban design and form of the proposed development is inappropriate and unacceptable and fails to integrate successfully with its surrounding environment. I conclude that the decision of the Planning Authority, which sought to rectify the excessive retail floorspace and convenience and comparison content of the development through the use of conditions, was inappropriate and unworkable, and probably ultra vires its powers. On this basis, it should not be supported by the Board."
Pretty clear conclusions about how seriously Kilkenny County Council took their responsibilities and the extent to which they were a responsible party in this case. BTW, ultra vires means 'not legal'.0 -
Some interesting observations. The case for a boundary extension has been made by the Local Government Committee, and is based on what I would consider to be a rational assessment of governance needs in the Waterford region. Those opposing the boundary extension have not really engaged very well with these issues, and have instead tended to rely on whataboutery and silly childish quips rooted in localism and parochial tendencies. Some of this has been disheartening, but not surprising; this has happened before.
It has been suggested here that if Waterford has in fact got a plan for the city region, then it should present it publicly so that the concerned commentators can be persuaded. Sorry, but this is nonsense; the fact of the matter is that Waterford has no jurisdiction over this region - because of the boundary being located where it is. It does not have the capacity in legal or technical terms to make a plan for the region. Even though Kilkenny County Council is the authority responsible for much of this area, it has not shown that it has any plan or vision for the area that recognises its urban credentials- beyond a Local Area Plan that has no functional relationship with the city to which it adjoins.
Some have suggested that the way forward for the city region is cooperation! I am sorry but the horse has bolted on that one. The local authorities involved have demonstrated clearly that cooperation is simply not a realistic option, and that the relationship is based on competition rather than cooperation. Waterford was the only city not to have an agreed Retail Strategy - guess why not? By the way, this notion that Kilkenny County Council's decision to permit Ferrybank shopping Centre (Exhibit A in the case for a boundary extension) was not a decisive and irresponsible act is delusional. It was not simply an attempt to provide for the shopping needs of a suburban area of a few thousand people - it is a Regional scale District centre (37,000 square metres in scale)- aimed at a very large regional catchment. This was done in the full knowledge of its potential impact on the city centre; I cannot see how that can be interpreted as benign - it was predatory as an economic intervention - and in my mind a deliberate and cynical attempt to sabotage Waterford's regeneration aspirations. Why would Waterford City Council, the then New Ross and Carrick on Suir Town Councils, as well as Wexford and Waterford chambers' of Commerce have objected?
For information, as I understand it, An Bord Pleanala did not adjudicate on the permitted development in Ferrybank - Kilkenny County Council decided that one all on their own; the appeal appears to have been withdrawn and there are no reports of file for this decision. They did make a refusal on an earlier application on the same site. In it the Inspector noted the following;
"I conclude that the proposed development is grossly excessive, in scale and extent of floorspace, to serve the local needs of the developing northern suburbs of Waterford City. In addition, I conclude that the convenience content of the development is excessive, and would have a detrimental impact on the town centres of New Ross and Carrick-on-Suir, and that the comparison content of the proposed development, because of its excessive scale and nature, would be likely to impact adversely on the vibrancy and vitality of Waterford city centre, in contravention of the provisions of the Environs Development Plan and of the principles and purpose of the Retail Planning Guidelines. I also consider that the urban design and form of the proposed development is inappropriate and unacceptable and fails to integrate successfully with its surrounding environment. I conclude that the decision of the Planning Authority, which sought to rectify the excessive retail floorspace and convenience and comparison content of the development through the use of conditions, was inappropriate and unworkable, and probably ultra vires its powers. On this basis, it should not be supported by the Board."
Pretty clear conclusions about how seriously Kilkenny County Council took their responsibilities and the extent to which they were a responsible party in this case. BTW, ultra vires means 'not legal'.
I'm not sure if the reference to those against the extension not arguing their case well is aimed at me? For the record, I have acknowledged that there really is no good argument against the extension. The point that I have made is to query whether it will make a huge difference or at least, whether expectations are unrealistic as regards the benefits. The likes of Johnboy and Zulutango have drawn attention to the potential advantages. I accept that properly funded and properly planned, it could be a real benefit to the region. Done badly and without proper funding, we may well find ourselves asking what all the fuss was about.
I don't think that it's unreasonable that WCC should give us some indication of a vision for the relevant area. After all, they have lobbied for the extension so surely they have some idea as to how it might develop in the future? Would it really hurt to publicise to some degree what these plans are? After all, if the extension application fails, it will be down to political pressure. Surely some "marketing" from WCC could reduce the opposition? They may have no jurisdiction over the area but they have applied for the extension so it's not as though they're prohibited from expressing a view as to how they might seek to develop the area.
On the shopping centre issue, I stand corrected as regards An Bord Pleanala/Ferrybank shopping Centre. It beggars belief that WCC didn't bring the matter to the Bord. I still believe that it was disregard for Waterford as opposed to any deliberate desire to sabotage Waterford that was behind the decision to grant permission in that case, as well as the inability to resist the lure of development charges. One huge issue with that shopping centre is traffic, apart from all the other issues. Traffic is fraught enough in Ferrybank as it stands. I do not know where the traffic will go if it ever becomes operational.0 -
Advertisement
Advertisement