Waterford's €400m development could create thousands of jobs

Aquos76

Sully wrote: »

How long does it take for the application to appear on the councils website again? I look forward to seeing the space shutle application

Planning has been lodged with KilkennyCoCo for part of this development

http://www.kilkennycoco.ie/PlanningDetails.aspx?FileNo=08794

And also with Waterford Corp

http://www.waterfordcity.ie/ePlan/InternetEnquiry/rpt_ViewApplicDetails.asp?validFileNum=1&app_num_file=08188

http://www.waterfordcity.ie/ePlan/InternetEnquiry/rpt_ViewApplicDetails.asp?validFileNum=1&app_num_file=08189

mike65

Crazy crazy business having to get two authorities to give the go-ahead on a scheme like this. What happens if one says no?

Mike.

KingLoser

Waterford City Council is the lead authority on this I believe.

Which means if they give the go ahead, KKCC will need a damn good reason for rejecting it.

Green Hornet

dlofnep wrote: »

What, there will be more than one skyscraper?

The Bilberry development will get cut back. There's no way they'll give permission for a 32 story skyscraper. TBH it would look out of place. There's plans for a lot of Colditz style appartments there too. They'll get permission for a hotel and some shops but not the development as it looks on the plans.

merlante

Green Hornet wrote: »

The Bilberry development will get cut back. There's no way they'll give permission for a 32 story skyscraper. TBH it would look out of place. There's plans for a lot of Colditz style appartments there too. They'll get permission for a hotel and some shops but not the development as it looks on the plans.

I hope you are wrong, it is the only place near the city centre, backed by a steep hill, where we could hope to build a skyscraper. It would be the ideal piece of iconic architecture for the northern approach to the city.

If you look at the main obstacles to developments in Waterford city centre they tend to stem around increased traffic, lowering light levels for residents, interference with archaeology, and disagreement with the city development plan.

Traffic will be an issue, and perhaps some kind of one-way system would have to be instigated on the Bilberry rd., possibly with other road works funded by the developers, but I think that it is doable. Given that we have only one bridge, soon to be two with a toll, that (in any way) serve the city centre, there will always be traffic problems with traffic coming from the north side. As for the south side, the development will have to have good links to the outer ring road, which will necessitate road works, which if the developers have a half a billion to spend on this development shouldn't be a problem.

As for the light levels, I think this development will be sufficiently set off from the urban core of the city such that it won't be a big issue. Obviously the new houses built overlooking the Suir will be objectors one way or the other. That can't be helped.

There should not be any archaeology on the site, so that won't be a problem. Also, I believe this area has been earmarked by the council for significant development, so it should not conflict (and indeed should agree with) the city development plan.

Although, a lot of people do believe that An Bord Pleanala is a 'reject outright or reduce the height for the sake of it' type of process, it is not clear to me what reasoning they would give for reducing the height in this case. That is, unless they are saying that Waterford effectively can't ever have a building of this size, which I would strongly disagree with.

Aquos76

Well in relation to the application for the Bilberry development, there are so far 27 submissions after been made against this. Many of these are from residents of Bowefield and Gracedieu, Also Brendan McCann ,the HSE, and Southern regional Fisheries board lodged separate submissions.

Mr McCann did acknowledge that there was a need for development on this site as it was an "eyesore" He felt that this development was a "missed opportunity". He refers to traffic congestion and lack of public transport also.

The fisheries board, have no objections to the actual development but have issues on the effect of the water and fish life during the construction stages.

source: Waterford Today front page story Wed 18/6/08

CantGetNoSleep

Aquos76 wrote: »

Well in relation to the application for the Bilberry development, there are so far 27 submissions after been made against this. Many of these are from residents of Bowefield and Gracedieu, Also Brendan McCann ,the HSE, and Southern regional Fisheries board lodged separate submissions.

Mr McCann did acknowledge that there was a need for development on this site as it was an "eyesore" He felt that this development was a "missed opportunity". He refers to traffic congestion and lack of public transport also.

The fisheries board, have no objections to the actual development but have issues on the effect of the water and fish life during the construction stages.

source: Waterford Today front page story Wed 18/6/08

My reply to that comment would get me banned i'd say, but i'm sure everyone else is thinking the same so there is no need for me to spell it out on here

mike65

Well McCan't is correct about traffic, its a pokey road which exits onto a one way junction.

Mike.

BBM77

Aquos76 wrote: »

Mr McCann did acknowledge that there was a need for development on this site as it was an "eyesore" He felt that this development was a "missed opportunity". He refers to traffic congestion and lack of public transport also.

This means nothing. It is McCann’s standard objection to very major development. If you were to look back at his previous objections you would find the same kind of thing. It is clearly his strategy in objections to say: I am in favour of development on the site but........... This is the usual delay tactics from McCann as far as I can see.

Who is McCann?

Will be a pity to see the ArdRí go - I kinda liked the old hotel...

Sully

Deleted User wrote: »

Who is McCann?

Will be a pity to see the ArdRí go - I kinda liked the old hotel...

He would be what people call a serial objector.