Boundary Extension for City?

blue note · 22-05-2017 11:46am

There's no political gain to it. The last thing that will happen is that a new leader will come in and do something to dent their popularity.

It doesn't matter that an independent report recommended it. The individuals who decide whether or not it will happen have nothing to gain and potentially will lose from it, so it won't happen.

zulutango · 22-05-2017 11:52am

blue note wrote: »

There's no political gain to it. The last thing that will happen is that a new leader will come in and do something to dent their popularity.

It doesn't matter that an independent report recommended it. The individuals who decide whether or not it will happen have nothing to gain and potentially will lose from it, so it won't happen.

It doesn't always come down to that. Politicians sometimes try to do what is right and sensible, and Varadkar has form in that regard. For example, when he was transport minister he gave Shannon Airport autonomy from the DAA even though there was a lot of opposition to it. He also postponed the M20 in the face of local pressure (which was the wrong decision but he was still brave enough to make an unpopular one). He's also in favour of repealing in the 8th amendment which is a position that is very much at odds with that of Fine Gael's core support.

blue note · 22-05-2017 12:04pm

zulutango wrote:

It doesn't always come down to that. Politicians sometimes try to do what is right and sensible, and Varadkar has form in that regard. For example, when he was transport minister he gave Shannon Airport autonomy from the DAA even though there was a lot of opposition to it. He also postponed the M20 in the face of local pressure (which was the wrong decision but he was still brave enough to make an unpopular one). He's also in favour of repealing in the 8th amendment which is a position that is very much at odds with that of Fine Gael's core support.

I hope you're right. I just don't see it as worthwhile for them. Politically it would be massively unpopular for them in Kilkenny. They'd lose a heap of votes over it. I can't see them doing it.

zulutango · 22-05-2017 12:19pm

blue note wrote: »

I hope you're right. I just don't see it as worthwhile for them. Politically it would be massively unpopular for them in Kilkenny. They'd lose a heap of votes over it. I can't see them doing it.

In that situation he'll allow Phelan to jump up and down about it and be seen to be fighting for Kilkenny's best interests. Kilkenny folks won't blame Phelan then when the inevitable happens.

blue note · 22-05-2017 12:35pm

zulutango wrote: »

In that situation he'll allow Phelan to jump up and down about it and be seen to be fighting for Kilkenny's best interests. Kilkenny folks won't blame Phelan then when the inevitable happens.

Plenty of them will blame Fine Gael because it happened under their watch. And they'll switch to Fianna Fail in protest.

fricatus · 22-05-2017 12:49pm

blue note wrote: »

Plenty of them will blame Fine Gael because it happened under their watch. And they'll switch to Fianna Fail in protest.

Like we switched to Fianna Fáil when they abolished our city council, closed our VEC headquarters and moved it to Wexford, and when they carved up the south-east hospital group between Dublin and Cork. Oh, and also when they didn't deliver on 24h cardiac care... hmmm

Pardon the sarcasm but there is no way large numbers of voters would switch sides over this. Maybe an individual politician would kick up a fuss, but then resign the party whip? I seriously doubt it. If JPP resigned over this and hadn't resigned over the continuing failure to deliver 24h cardio, he would stand accused of being a pure parish-pump politician.

Squidvicious · 22-05-2017 1:27pm

fricatus wrote: »

Like we switched to Fianna Fáil when they abolished our city council, closed our VEC headquarters and moved it to Wexford, and when they carved up the south-east hospital group between Dublin and Cork. Oh, and also when they didn't deliver on 24h cardiac care... hmmm

Pardon the sarcasm but there is no way large numbers of voters would switch sides over this. Maybe an individual politician would kick up a fuss, but then resign the party whip? I seriously doubt it. If JPP resigned over this and hadn't resigned over the continuing failure to deliver 24h cardio, he would stand accused of being a pure parish-pump politician.

To a large extent, you're right. The boundary issue isn't a priority one way or another for most people. Most of us will vote based on more important matters. However, with Bobby Aylward banging the drum on this issue, Phelan could be worried about losing a couple of hundred votes and it could certainly do that. Not a big number of votes, but he will reason, why risk even a couple of hundred votes? In a tight election, that could be the difference that would see him drummed out and FG HQ will take a similar view. The biggest problem is that while the boundary change could lose votes in KK, does anyone believe that it could lose/win votes in Waterford? Waterford voters are less bothered about it in my view.

The proof of the pudding is in the fact that Coveney decided to back down on the issue before the leadership election because he feared losing FG members votes in Carlow/Kilkenny instead of pushing it to gain Waterford votes.

Max Powers · 22-05-2017 1:45pm

Think its dead myself, Leo and Simon won't do anything about it, attitude will be who gives a toss about that.we'll do it again on another twenty years probably, only hope would be if person in charge was willing to follow thru on sensible recommendations,coveney wouldn't/didn't and other lad the same in all likelihood.only positive was, most people unbiased to issue, thought it sensible.

BBM77 · 23-11-2020 12:35pm

See this has come up again. Interesting that it is a green party councillor that is raising the motion. Considering Eamon Ryan is the Minister for the Environment. Will see what happens. Queue absurd commentary from Kilkenny…

Harry Palmr · 23-11-2020 12:51pm

I believe Damo will be talking about this on tomorrows programme, but either way I'll make sure to flag it or the podcast when it happens.

It's hard to imagine that a scintilla of movement has occurred since the Spring so all feels a bit pointless.
I think one plan is to extend the City boundary but within the existing county so people will still be in KK for all hurling purposes but within Waterford City for rent, rates, planning, etc. Of course that would mean Ferrybank Shopping Centre would be ours

BBM77 · 23-11-2020 1:08pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I believe Damo will be talking about this on tomorrows programme, but either way I'll make sure to flag it or the podcast when it happens.

It's hard to imagine that a scintilla of movement has occurred since the Spring so all feels a bit pointless.
I think one plan is to extend the City boundary but within the existing county so people will still be in KK for all hurling purposes but within Waterford City for rent, rates, planning, etc. Of course that would mean Ferrybank Shopping Centre would be ours

It is only the area within the bypass that is not already part of the city that would be coming back to Waterford city. And I say coming back on purpose. Can't see that it is hurling that is the barrier. Can't even remember ever seeing a KK flag flying in that area when they are in an All-Ireland final. The vast majority, if not all, of the opposition to the extension was from Kilkenny people outside the area in question.

Dunmoreroader · 23-11-2020 1:40pm

BBM77 wrote: »

It is only the area within the bypass that is not already part of the city that would be coming back to Waterford city. And I say coming back on purpose. Can't see that it is hurling that is the barrier. Can't even remember ever seeing a KK flag flying in that area when they are in an All-Ireland final. The vast majority, if not all, of the opposition to the extension was from Kilkenny people outside the area in question.

Plenty of KK flags get flown there but leave Hurling out of it, local plebiscite should determine any switch. If it was just the built up areas of Ferrybank in Kilkenny(Rockshire road, Belmont, Abbey road etc.), it would be carried. If it was the rural areas only within the bypass( Newrath, Mullinabro, Cloone Rd., Milepost, Gyles Quay etc.) they'd vote no. The two combined would be carried for a switch to Waterford IMHO.

Harry Palmr · 23-11-2020 1:42pm

Well the beefing Burghers of Kilkenny city will be against it, they'd also be looking for a very big compensation package - probably well out of kilter with what they'd actually be due!

Harry Palmr · 25-11-2020 12:06pm

Here is the WLR discussion start at 9 minutes exactly it's with David Lane of SIPTU (who is also a Sinn Fein member I believe)

Deise Today Tuesday 24th November part 2

https://www.wlrfm.com/deise-today/

BBM77 · 25-11-2020 3:33pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Here is the WLR discussion start at 9 minutes exactly it's with David Lane of SIPTU (who is also a Sinn Fein member I believe)

Deise Today Tuesday 24th November part 2

https://www.wlrfm.com/deise-today/

DT was ridiculous! He kept going on about this stealing land nonsense. He did not want to hear the good points David Lane was making. He did not really want to discuss the issue just reduce the discussion to childish dribble to block logical points being made.

hardybuck · 25-11-2020 3:55pm

Unless there is a very strong new argument for this I think it should be left alone for a while.

DT seemed to be trying too hard to stimulate a bit of controversy in the conversation in the hope of getting a reaction from listeners.

I'm not sure what business the SIPTU Rep has coming on, but I don't think he made a very convincing argument either.

If it's just about allowing the city expand, then I don't think this proposal is necessary for another 20-30 years. There's plenty of opportunities to develop existing sites in the city centre, and we should be looking to increase the density rather than sprawling further out into Kilkenny.

If there's a strong argument that the folks in the KK side want to be administered from Waterford then I think you've a much better chance of progressing this.

azimuth17 · 25-11-2020 6:47pm

A boundary commission was appointed by the Minister for the Environment and made a recommendation that the section of land which was the northern liberties of the city of Waterford for hundreds of years should be returned to the administration of the city. It is open to any Minister for the Environment to implement that recommendation. I think it should happen, if only to simplify planning etc., in Ferrybank but anything the GAA has a hand in is toxic to politicians.

Dunmoreroader · 25-11-2020 7:07pm

I think I may have found why this issue is so contentious and why Kilkenny folk get so confused about where the boundary used be in olden days etc. This is the old Junior Cert Civics textbook showing the counties, towns, cities of Ireland for local government purposes.
I mean if the Dept. of Education think Kilkenny goes to the coast, why would the good folk of Kilkenny accept loosing all that territory and more? :pac:

BBM77 · 25-11-2020 10:27pm

hardybuck wrote: »

Unless there is a very strong new argument for this I think it should be left alone for a while.

DT seemed to be trying too hard to stimulate a bit of controversy in the conversation in the hope of getting a reaction from listeners.

I'm not sure what business the SIPTU Rep has coming on, but I don't think he made a very convincing argument either.

If it's just about allowing the city expand, then I don't think this proposal is necessary for another 20-30 years. There's plenty of opportunities to develop existing sites in the city centre, and we should be looking to increase the density rather than sprawling further out into Kilkenny.

If there's a strong argument that the folks in the KK side want to be administered from Waterford then I think you've a much better chance of progressing this.

Completely disagree with you. As has been said, a boundary commission was appointed by the Minister for the Environment and made a recommendation for an extension. So clearly the grounds for an extension are more than valid.

hardybuck · 25-11-2020 11:35pm

BBM77 wrote: »

Completely disagree with you. As has been said, a boundary commission was appointed by the Minister for the Environment and made a recommendation for an extension. So clearly the grounds for an extension are more than valid.

I'm sure there was plenty of grounds for an extension. However they decided not to proceed with it, I suspect because the proposal just annoyed too many people for it to be viable.

Unless something significant has changed in the last two or three years you're stuck with the same problem. The people living there should be calling for this rather than the change being put upon them.

The union rep on the radio focused on allowing Waterford to grow. Perhaps there is evidence of a lack of space for development to take place, but as far as I can tell there are significant opportunities for infill across the city, lots of empty units, vacant sites and under-developed sites that could add extra capacity for many years to come.

If there is a focus on more effective local administration then I think you've got a more compelling argument. However the Councils seem to be working together at the moment on a few projects like the NQs, the airport and the Greenway so it'd be a shame to see things sour.

invara · 26-11-2020 12:55am

The strategic significance of getting the boundary extension cannot be under-estimated. In the next census, both Limerick and Cork's populations will be jacked up as they got their boundary extension over the line. Galway took in Salthill in 1986 to leapfrog us, both cities are around the same size, but Galway reports 79k people, Waterford 53k. Dubs, looking at us through a spreadsheet will think Waterford is tiny and will forget that the boundary extension artificially suppresses the urban population; and as a result, we will be denied services (such as cardiac care or a university). It is not too extreme to say, that the bizarre decision by Simon Coveney to overturn the recommended boundary extension puts some of our lives at risk.

hardybuck · 26-11-2020 11:05am

I've had a chance to look through the review, and the key thing that struck me was that 19,131 submissions were provided as part of the public consultation process. Of these, 19,036 opposed any change of the boundary. That's 99.5% of submissions not backing this thing which gives you an hint as to why this didn't happen.

There's supposed to be 4,500 people living in that area and it looks like there were very few people interested in this - but maybe that could change.

The last thing Waterford needs from a PR perspective is another attempt at land grab - this will be as it's described.

If there is a desire to artificially grow the city population for statistical purposes as invara has suggested it would be less contentious to extend the city boundary over to Passage East or Tramore.

invara · 26-11-2020 11:15am

hardybuck wrote: »

If there is a desire to artificially grow the city population for statistical purposes as invara has suggested it would be less contentious to extend the city boundary over to Dunmore East or Tramore.

I agree, but it is not artificial. If you look at CSO data commuting patterns show that Tramore is as functionally related to the city as the Dunmore rd. I made this submission the MASP process- https://www.southernassembly.ie/regional-planning/rses .

I am biased here as I live in Tramore and often find myself on the third or fourth spin into Waterford in a day with kids' activities and work; 45.7% of persons at work and living in Tramore work in Waterford half of all Tramore people. That is a similar % to the new parts of Cork City and Limerick cities.
Limerick city under the MASP zone is mad, stretching out deep into the fields of Tipp and Clare in search of a population boost.

curmudgeonly · 26-11-2020 12:29pm

hardybuck wrote: »

I've had a chance to look through the review, and the key thing that struck me was that 19,131 submissions were provided as part of the public consultation process. Of these, 19,036 opposed any change of the boundary. That's 99.5% of submissions not backing this thing which gives you an hint as to why this didn't happen.

There's supposed to be 4,500 people living in that area and it looks like there were very few people interested in this - but maybe that could change.

The last thing Waterford needs from a PR perspective is another attempt at land grab - this will be as it's described.

If there is a desire to artificially grow the city population for statistical purposes as invara has suggested it would be less contentious to extend the city boundary over to Passage East or Tramore.

I made a submission to public consultation process in the positive, and perused a lot of the submissions at the time, a huge amount of them were one liners saying no, so on a percentage basis it is hard to call it as objective. IMO the main reason it was spiked by Minister Coveney at the time was J P Phelan said he was out the gap if it was sanctioned, he would have lost his base in one fell swoop, simple as that and the Government of the time could not face it.

In other words it was self preservation for a politician at the cost of the community he is supposed to serve.

Dunmoreroader · 26-11-2020 1:23pm

hardybuck wrote: »

I've had a chance to look through the review, and the key thing that struck me was that 19,131 submissions were provided as part of the public consultation process. Of these, 19,036 opposed any change of the boundary. That's 99.5% of submissions not backing this thing which gives you an hint as to why this didn't happen.

There's supposed to be 4,500 people living in that area and it looks like there were very few people interested in this - but maybe that could change.

The last thing Waterford needs from a PR perspective is another attempt at land grab - this will be as it's described.

If there is a desire to artificially grow the city population for statistical purposes as invara has suggested it would be less contentious to extend the city boundary over to Passage East or Tramore.

I've looked through the review too and the vast majority of the submissions didn't even come from the area under review. Most were from Kilkenny City, which is interesting in itself, and the next most exercised area was Mooncoin(probably worried they're next).
As I've said already a plebiscite of the area chosen would vote to join Waterford City, the natural order of things, not "artificial growth".

mart 23 · 26-11-2020 1:24pm

invara wrote: »

I agree, but it is not artificial. If you look at CSO data commuting patterns show that Tramore is as functionally related to the city as the Dunmore rd. I made this submission the MASP process- https://www.southernassembly.ie/regional-planning/rses .

I am biased here as I live in Tramore and often find myself on the third or fourth spin into Waterford in a day with kids' activities and work; 45.7% of persons at work and living in Tramore work in Waterford half of all Tramore people. That is a similar % to the new parts of Cork City and Limerick cities.
Limerick city under the MASP zone is mad, stretching out deep into the fields of Tipp and Clare in search of a population boost.

No parts of Clare or Tipp are included in the population of Limerick City.

Squidvicious · 26-11-2020 1:34pm

Dunmoreroader wrote: »

I've looked through the review too and the vast majority of the submissions didn't even come from the area under review. Most were from Kilkenny City, which is interesting in itself, and the next most exercised area was Mooncoin(probably worried they're next).
As I've said already a plebiscite of the area chosen would vote to join Waterford City, the natural order of things, not "artificial growth".

But the bottom line is that, whatever way you look at it, there weren't many submissions from Waterford about the extension either so people in Kilkenny city seemed to be more worked about it than people in Waterford city.
I don't see the government touching this issue for now. FF were against it while in opposition and I doubt FG will want to bring it up again either. Nor is there anybody in opposition who will bang this drum either - the Shinners are against it too. However, I suspect that there will be quite a bit of housing development in the Ferrybank area over the coming years and that may be when the boundary extension finally does come about. As has been said before, people in the housing estates in Ferrybank would probably be mainly in favour of an extension and it will probably be the same for any estates that are built it the future. I suspect that Waterford can say "Tiocfaidh ár lá" on this story but it will have to wait a while longer.

Squidvicious · 26-11-2020 1:35pm

invara wrote: »

The strategic significance of getting the boundary extension cannot be under-estimated. In the next census, both Limerick and Cork's populations will be jacked up as they got their boundary extension over the line. Galway took in Salthill in 1986 to leapfrog us, both cities are around the same size, but Galway reports 79k people, Waterford 53k. Dubs, looking at us through a spreadsheet will think Waterford is tiny and will forget that the boundary extension artificially suppresses the urban population; and as a result, we will be denied services (such as cardiac care or a university). It is not too extreme to say, that the bizarre decision by Simon Coveney to overturn the recommended boundary extension puts some of our lives at risk.

But would a population increase of c. 4.5K really make a big difference to these calculations?

invara · 26-11-2020 2:33pm

mart 23 wrote: »

No parts of Clare or Tipp are included in the population of Limerick City.

Shocking but Limerick’s Metropolitan Area actually includes the Clare town of Shannon, dragging in 10k people who live 23.5km from O'Connell St. , and a healthy chunk of Tipperary.

Cork’s Metropolitan Area includes Carrigaline (15k people | 15.7km), Ballincollig (18k people | 8.9km) and Middleton (12k people | 23.5k ).

Waterford’s Metropolitan Area excludes Tramore (10k people | 12.6km), New Ross (9k people | 23km), Carrick on Suir (6k people | 27km), and smaller settlements of Mooncoin, Mulinavat, Kilmathomas, Dunmore East and Passage East that are suburban to Waterford. If the MASP area was cast in Waterford like it was in Limerick and Cork, it might have brought around 45k who live in Waterford's hinterland.

http://www.southernassembly.ie/regional-planning/rses

invara · 26-11-2020 2:38pm

Squidvicious wrote: »

But would a population increase of c. 4.5K really make a big difference to these calculations?

Yes. In 1986 Waterford was bigger than Galway (~37k V 36k from memory). Gerrymandering accounts for the initial separation of Galway's growth from Waterford, additional urban services in healthcare, university and cultural investment did the rest. Galway is now at 78k and Waterford at 52k, 50k is the threshold that defines a city for European statistical purposes.

Why are the other cities working so hard to artificially jack up their populations and hold ours down- money follows this data. Read the Herity report on 24/7 cardiac care to understand how an outsider analyses service needs based on spreadsheets.

Boundary Extension for City?

Comments