€300M Investment into Waterford City

robtri · 21-03-2017 9:40pm

love to see a detail plan of what they plan for the North Quay's...
this is great for the city and the region.

fuzzy dunlop · 21-03-2017 10:59pm

Teebor15 wrote: »

This is brilliant news for Waterford...but just how over the line is it?

Is it a John Halligan type "done deal" where the Saudis are just going to have one more look before signing on the dotted line? or are they fully committed just waiting on our side to get their ducks in a row.

After so many false dawns in this city, with the University, hospital, Airport, etc..that i can be forgiven for being twitchy until i see the bricks being laid.

Believe me! I feel your pain.But I am cautiously optimistic about this.If it works out it will be the biggest economic boost this city probably ever had.It will be a huge vote of confidence for Waterford that could encourage investment here for decades to come. And some people won't be happy about it. I heard the mayor of Waterford already say he received emails that were "influencers" from some of our "neighbours".
The SDZ status was the game changer that will hopefully nullify any attempts at influence it negatively. It think it will be impossible for "objectors" to do what they did with Newgate. Check my posting history. I used to curse Paudie Coffey from a height but he deserves great Kudos for this.

looksee · 21-03-2017 11:23pm

I wonder will women be allowed into the centre unaccompanied, and allowed to drive into the car park?

Christy Browne · 21-03-2017 11:28pm

looksee wrote: »

I wonder will women be allowed into the centre unaccompanied, and allowed to drive into the car park?

I reckon so yeah, contrary to popular belief, property developers from other countries can't enforce the laws of their country here :rolleyes:

looksee · 21-03-2017 11:44pm

Christy Browne wrote: »

I reckon so yeah, contrary to popular belief, property developers from other countries can't enforce the laws of their country here :rolleyes:

Sigh

Harry Palmr · 21-03-2017 11:54pm

Whooooooooooooooosh!

22-03-2017 12:25am

looksee wrote: »

Sigh

You are not happy with blood money coming to Waterford?

Deiseen · 22-03-2017 7:16am

Deleted User wrote: »

looksee wrote: »

Sigh

You are not happy with blood money coming to Waterford?

If it was coming from China, the UK or even our beloved USA then it would be every bit as bloody.

Not a big fan of the Saudis at all but this can't be seen as a bad thing.

blue note · 22-03-2017 9:56am

Which are the north quays? Are they the side with the train station? If so, would this be a large shopping centre being built just down the road from an empty large shopping centre?

Harry Palmr · 22-03-2017 10:03am

The north quays will probably be host to the relocated railways station plus housing, offices and a conference facility I'd say. Not a shopping centre.

looksee · 22-03-2017 10:11am

It would be hugely expensive to move the railway station to the North Quays and it is hard to see how it would be a profitable investment. It floods to a depth of over a metre now; moving it nearer to the river without a gradient would make the situation worse.

Deise_vixen · 22-03-2017 4:24pm

Slightly off topic but regarding Burger King, I heard that BK were not happy to commit to move to food court that will be upstairs in City Square because there are on going discussions with Nandos to move there also. Their lease is now up on the current site and was not being renewed as it's being re designated as a retail outlet.
I also heard (a bloke down the pub said..... ;)) that they were not doing great in that location and were already looking for an alternative location in the city*. Apparently someone has applied for planning for a fast food restaurant at the old bowling alley site on the Cork Road. Now wouldn't it be a funny coincidence if they moved in there....
*This could be complete fabrication, no way to verify so take it with a pinch of salt

Deiseen · 22-03-2017 4:27pm

Deise_vixen wrote: »

Slightly off topic but regarding Burger King, I heard that BK were not happy to commit to move to food court that will be upstairs in City Square because there are on going discussions with Nandos to move there also. Their lease is now up on the current site and was not being renewed as it's being re designated as a retail outlet.
I also heard (a bloke down the pub said..... ;)) that they were not doing great in that location and were already looking for an alternative location in the city*. Apparently someone has applied for planning for a fast food restaurant at the old bowling alley site on the Cork Road. Now wouldn't it be a funny coincidence if they moved in there....
*This could be complete fabrication, no way to verify so take it with a pinch of salt

That's easily verified. Some people on here very savvy with regards to the planning section of the WCC website.

iseegirls · 22-03-2017 4:39pm

Deise_vixen wrote: »

Slightly off topic but regarding Burger King, I heard that BK were not happy to commit to move to food court that will be upstairs in City Square because there are on going discussions with Nandos to move there also.

Good to hear they're aiming for big names for the food court. Would hate for it to be populated with more Costa's which we don't need at the moment.

Road-Hog · 22-03-2017 4:54pm

looksee wrote: »

It would be hugely expensive to move the railway station to the North Quays and it is hard to see how it would be a profitable investment. It floods to a depth of over a metre now; moving it nearer to the river without a gradient would make the situation worse.

How often does it flood to such a depth?

erica74 · 22-03-2017 5:12pm

That's great news about the food court - hoping to see some actual food outlets and not just coffee shops, like another poster mentioned.

fuzzy dunlop · 22-03-2017 7:19pm

Road-Hog wrote: »

looksee wrote: »

It would be hugely expensive to move the railway station to the North Quays and it is hard to see how it would be a profitable investment. It floods to a depth of over a metre now; moving it nearer to the river without a gradient would make the situation worse.

How often does it flood to such a depth?

I am interested too. Three posts by looksee! None of them positive! Two of them Sarcastic! Perhaps one of the influencers" Adam Wyse was talking about on Deise AM:D An ideal Scenario in my opinion would be a pedestrian bridge from the Clock Tower. On the other side the pedestrian bridge a mixed use development with a large retail element. The Railway Station then integrated into this. So you would get off an intercity train and step into a retail area, so a walkthrough across the bridge up into John Roberts Square. I wouldn't be hopeful though if for no other reason that CIE as a national organization are a bunch of spiteful c*nts, who exist for CIE alone and not for the common good.

tombliboo83 · 22-03-2017 8:40pm

For the station to move there,money would have to be provided centrally to Irish rail via an increase in subvention. This will not happen as Irish rail barely have the money for basic network maintenance, never mind anything extra (which won't be gotten) for large scale capital plans outside of Dublin.
I can't see where the money would come from for such a move which is a pity as where the station is now is wholly unsuitable.

Road-Hog · 22-03-2017 11:07pm

tombliboo83 wrote: »

For the station to move there,money would have to be provided centrally to Irish rail via an increase in subvention. This will not happen as Irish rail barely have the money for basic network maintenance, never mind anything extra (which won't be gotten) for large scale capital plans outside of Dublin.
I can't see where the money would come from for such a move which is a pity as where the station is now is wholly unsuitable.

What makes you so pessimistic about the station moving, I am aware that CIE are a dose to deal with and as conservative as the pope but I do think this time they will yield and funding will be found to re-locate the station to within the proposed Saudi funded development, Saudi's might even be prepared to fund it given the potential increase in 'foot-fall' it would bring on a daily basis???

TheQuietFella · 22-03-2017 11:21pm

Road-Hog wrote: »

What makes you so pessimistic about the station moving, I am aware that CIE are a dose to deal with and as conservative as the pope but I do think this time they will yield and funding will be found to re-locate the station to within the proposed Saudi funded development, Saudi's might even be prepared to fund it given the potential increase in 'foot-fall' it would bring on a daily basis???

They're also going to buy Waterford F.C. and sign Lionel Messi!

Max Powers · 22-03-2017 11:21pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

I am interested too. Three posts by looksee! None of them positive! Two of them Sarcastic! .

True, a few peoples eagerness to whine or try to be negative is astounding..

Deiseen · 23-03-2017 12:00am

tombliboo83 wrote: »

For the station to move there,money would have to be provided centrally to Irish rail via an increase in subvention. This will not happen as Irish rail barely have the money for basic network maintenance, never mind anything extra (which won't be gotten) for large scale capital plans outside of Dublin.
I can't see where the money would come from for such a move which is a pity as where the station is now is wholly unsuitable.

Doesn't the SDZ allocation mean that the government have to provide funding for things like relocating the station? Maybe i read it wrong but that's how it seems to me.

Harry Palmr · 23-03-2017 12:04am

The deal requires an infrastructure investment of 70m by the state/semi states by the looks of it - so will the gubberment cut off our nose to spite our face?

Max Powers · 23-03-2017 12:05am

Deiseen wrote: »

Doesn't the SDZ allocation mean that the government have to provide funding for things like relocating the station? Maybe i read it wrong but that's how it seems to me.

Something like that yeah, important site so infrastructure will be PRIORITISED or some other wording, can be vague priority etc etc.I think the other main thing with it is faster planning permission.apparently the SDZ is one of the main reasons for interest.the interest in Waterford appears on some saudi news sites too, just having a little look on line there about where else potential investment is news worthy.

looksee · 23-03-2017 12:40am

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

I am interested too. Three posts by looksee! None of them positive! Two of them Sarcastic! Perhaps one of the influencers" Adam Wyse was talking about on Deise AM:D An ideal Scenario in my opinion would be a pedestrian bridge from the Clock Tower. On the other side the pedestrian bridge a mixed use development with a large retail element. The Railway Station then integrated into this. So you would get off an intercity train and step into a retail area, so a walkthrough across the bridge up into John Roberts Square. I wouldn't be hopeful though if for no other reason that CIE as a national organization are a bunch of spiteful c*nts, who exist for CIE alone and not for the common good.

The first two posts were in reference to the source of the investment rather than resulting investment in Waterford.

The third point was about the railway station and is a simple statement of fact. Whatever about the flooding it would be ridiculously expensive to move the station, it would be more logical to move it back up the line a bit and build something more accessible. However the only reason for Saudis to build in Waterford is to turn a profit. I cannot see that the expense of moving the station to the North Quays would be worthwhile to the investors just on the basis of increased footfall. How many people would have to be attracted to Waterford to provide that footfall?

Yes, Waterford desperately needs investment, but how many Waterford people would regularly go over the river to the North Quays for the retail that is being discussed? There is already an empty shopping centre. There are empty offices all over the city - a conference centre would probably work, but more offices?

Buy cheap from NAMA, get all sorts of tax breaks to build - buildings - sit on them for a while, then sell them back to Waterford when they discover they really need to do something worthwhile with the North Quays?

One really good, worthwhile, tourist attraction would be a much better long term proposition than more retail outlets.

Road-Hog · 23-03-2017 7:42am

looksee wrote: »

The first two posts were in reference to the source of the investment rather than resulting investment in Waterford.

The third point was about the railway station and is a simple statement of fact. Whatever about the flooding it would be ridiculously expensive to move the station, it would be more logical to move it back up the line a bit and build something more accessible. However the only reason for Saudis to build in Waterford is to turn a profit. I cannot see that the expense of moving the station to the North Quays would be worthwhile to the investors just on the basis of increased footfall. How many people would have to be attracted to Waterford to provide that footfall?

Yes, Waterford desperately needs investment, but how many Waterford people would regularly go over the river to the North Quays for the retail that is being discussed? There is already an empty shopping centre. There are empty offices all over the city - a conference centre would probably work, but more offices?

Buy cheap from NAMA, get all sorts of tax breaks to build - buildings - sit on them for a while, then sell them back to Waterford when they discover they really need to do something worthwhile with the North Quays?

One really good, worthwhile, tourist attraction would be a much better long term proposition than more retail outlets.

All we can assume is that the saudis have done their homework etc.....from what I've read they have invested in other not so attractive places in UK already

Deiseen · 23-03-2017 7:48am

looksee wrote: »

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

I am interested too. Three posts by looksee! None of them positive! Two of them Sarcastic! Perhaps one of the influencers" Adam Wyse was talking about on Deise AM:D An ideal Scenario in my opinion would be a pedestrian bridge from the Clock Tower. On the other side the pedestrian bridge a mixed use development with a large retail element. The Railway Station then integrated into this. So you would get off an intercity train and step into a retail area, so a walkthrough across the bridge up into John Roberts Square. I wouldn't be hopeful though if for no other reason that CIE as a national organization are a bunch of spiteful c*nts, who exist for CIE alone and not for the common good.

The first two posts were in reference to the source of the investment rather than resulting investment in Waterford.

The third point was about the railway station and is a simple statement of fact. Whatever about the flooding it would be ridiculously expensive to move the station, it would be more logical to move it back up the line a bit and build something more accessible. However the only reason for Saudis to build in Waterford is to turn a profit. I cannot see that the expense of moving the station to the North Quays would be worthwhile to the investors just on the basis of increased footfall. How many people would have to be attracted to Waterford to provide that footfall?

Yes, Waterford desperately needs investment, but how many Waterford people would regularly go over the river to the North Quays for the retail that is being discussed? There is already an empty shopping centre. There are empty offices all over the city - a conference centre would probably work, but more offices?

Buy cheap from NAMA, get all sorts of tax breaks to build - buildings - sit on them for a while, then sell them back to Waterford when they discover they really need to do something worthwhile with the North Quays?

One really good, worthwhile, tourist attraction would be a much better long term proposition than more retail outlets.

It might stop them driving to Kilkenny shopping for the day. It will also attract people from the surrounding area, especially considering they won't have to cross the river. As people have said, this could be the catalyst for the hospital, the university and general public/private investment so just wait and see.

Squidvicious · 23-03-2017 9:59am

One question that I would have is in relation to traffic. Presumably, it's all going to have to enter/exit any development from/onto the existing dual carriageway. That's practically gridlocked most mornings so that's going to be a bit of a challenge to manage.

I don't see shops on that side being a viable proposition. The Michael Street development ought to be feasible but I'd say that's about all that would be needed for now. I really can't see a third major shopping area being viable(after City Sq/Michael St.).

That said, I suppose that these are good problems to have, questions of potential.

fuzzy dunlop · 23-03-2017 11:44am

looksee wrote: »

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

I am interested too. Three posts by looksee! None of them positive! Two of them Sarcastic! Perhaps one of the influencers" Adam Wyse was talking about on Deise AM:D An ideal Scenario in my opinion would be a pedestrian bridge from the Clock Tower. On the other side the pedestrian bridge a mixed use development with a large retail element. The Railway Station then integrated into this. So you would get off an intercity train and step into a retail area, so a walkthrough across the bridge up into John Roberts Square. I wouldn't be hopeful though if for no other reason that CIE as a national organization are a bunch of spiteful c*nts, who exist for CIE alone and not for the common good.

The first two posts were in reference to the source of the investment rather than resulting investment in Waterford.

The third point was about the railway station and is a simple statement of fact. Whatever about the flooding it would be ridiculously expensive to move the station, it would be more logical to move it back up the line a bit and build something more accessible. However the only reason for Saudis to build in Waterford is to turn a profit. I cannot see that the expense of moving the station to the North Quays would be worthwhile to the investors just on the basis of increased footfall. How many people would have to be attracted to Waterford to provide that footfall?

Yes, Waterford desperately needs investment, but how many Waterford people would regularly go over the river to the North Quays for the retail that is being discussed? There is already an empty shopping centre. There are empty offices all over the city - a conference centre would probably work, but more offices?

Buy cheap from NAMA, get all sorts of tax breaks to build - buildings - sit on them for a while, then sell them back to Waterford when they discover they really need to do something worthwhile with the North Quays?

One really good, worthwhile, tourist attraction would be a much better long term proposition than more retail outlets.

Your point about the railway station is not a statement of fact. It is mere opinion so far.Like everything else you have posted Your thinking about this is frankly backward which is why your bona fides are suspect on the issue. The idea of railway stations being pushed back to some area further away from the city defeats the purpose of having it. It is an engineering problem and far from an impossible one. The ridiculously expensive cost of moving the station? Where are you getting this from? The 300 million investment can easily be designed in a way (like all over Europe) where the station can be incorporated into the development. Virtually every significant railway station in the Netherlands has a retail element the size of city square. Does it really need pointing out to you that if the destination is good enough it has the potential to attract destination shoppers from as far as Dublin and Cork or further. You also seem to fall for the fallacy that a city's retail and services are exclusively supported by the available market in the city. Not true. Your tourism comments are frankly BS too and ignorant of reality. We have the best regional tourist offering already by far. Kilkenny can maybe compete with their urban tourism. Wexford with natural heritage but Waterford has both with a larger capacity for expansion. Again your "objection" seems to be more about finding fault than anything else which indicates a lack of honesty.

fuzzy dunlop · 23-03-2017 11:59am

Squidvicious wrote: »

One question that I would have is in relation to traffic. Presumably, it's all going to have to enter/exit any development from/onto the existing dual carriageway. That's practically gridlocked most mornings so that's going to be a bit of a challenge to manage.

I don't see shops on that side being a viable proposition. The Michael Street development ought to be feasible but I'd say that's about all that would be needed for now. I really can't see a third major shopping area being viable(after City Sq/Michael St.).

That said, I suppose that these are good problems to have, questions of potential.

60% of our own retailers shop in other cities according to Waterford CC. If this can be retained and the trend reversed then there is no reason to believe it is not viable. Including Michael Street, the equivalent of three City Squares would be added. There has been no extra retail of significance in Waterford since 1993. Incomes were smaller then and the population significantly so.Therefore the extra retail even on a superficial level looks viable. Athlone has added much more retail then this in a much smaller urban area in a much less populated region. This group are world leaders in what they do.They are not the Irish cowboys who tried to build Shopping Centres, Hotels and ""whatever your havin yourself"" in the middle of nowhere.

€300M Investment into Waterford City

Comments