Nature park to open in 2011

RobitTV

Next Spring will see the opening of a €4m nature park in the city.

The initiative will leave Waterford with one of the largest urban parklands in the country and create an urban oasis covering the equivalent to more than three times the area of the city’s People’s Park.

Two contractors are due on site at the end of April to finalise details of car parking facilities, while landscapers have been appointed and the design will go to tender this year.

Access into the park will be available for vehicles at an entrance by Kingfisher Leisure Centre, with pedestrian access available near-by also. A car park will be provided in a location that doesn’t interfere with the parkland.

Speaking at Waterford City Council’s monthly meeting last night, Cllr Cha O’Neill asked that another access point be made available as he said it was very far away for people on the top of the town to access it.

Colette Byrne, Director of Environmental Services and Planning, said that from a security point of view only one entrance would be open at the beginning.

AdMMM

I remember just starting Secondary School and having someone from the WCC come in and talk about these plans. Really hammers home how long some things take to come to fruition!

JohnC.

Where is this? Is there a map anywhere showing what area it covers?

AdMMM

It's the site of the old dump, assuming it's the same plans as I was told about 9 years a go or so.

dayshah

Will it link in with thwt walkway by superquinn.

I like the idea with all the apartments we need some parks. Maybe they could by the snowcream site too for a park out the posh side of town, and buy that land near farran park too

Psychedelic

Environmental sustainability will also be to the fore at the former landfill site on marshlands at Kilbarry, where a biodiversity park is being developed. An innovative wetland system will feature marshes, brackish ponds, tidal slough and estuaries. It will also provide a home or rest stop for many species of birds.

http://www.waterfordcity.ie/documents/downloads/Waterford2014.pdf

Cabaal

Psychedelic wrote: »

http://www.waterfordcity.ie/documents/downloads/Waterford2014.pdf

Good few things need to happen if they want Waterford to look like that in 2014

wellbutty

dayshah wrote: »

Will it link in with thwt walkway by superquinn.

I like the idea with all the apartments we need some parks. Maybe they could by the snowcream site too for a park out the posh side of town, and buy that land near farran park too

Sorry to disappoint you Dayshah but Glanbia put the following in for planning last week:

"a residential development comprising 40 No. 2-storey detached and terraced dwelling houses, associated works and works to improve woodland public open space. Accomodation will consist of 12 No. 4 bedroom detached houses(187.8sq.m), 12 No. 4 bedroom detached houses (234.1sq.m) & 11 No. 5 bedroom detached houses (282.6 sq.m) all of the above houses to be provided with detached garages (25.0sq.m). Existing former stable and outbuilding stuctures to be altered and extended to provide 5 No. 2-storey dwelling houses, including 2 No. 3 bedroom terrace houses (124.1sq.m & 131.3sq.m) & 3 No. 2 bedroom terrace houses (107.8sq.m, 104.5sq.m & 95.1sq.m). All of the above works to be undertaken complete with 2 new site entrances to Maypark Lane, car parking, demolition of existing structures, internal access roads, landscaping, reinstatement of existing pond and all associated site works"

Cabaal

wellbutty wrote: »

Sorry to disappoint you Dayshah but Glanbia put the following in for planning last week:

"a residential development comprising 40 No. 2-storey detached and terraced dwelling houses, associated works and works to improve woodland public open space. Accomodation will consist of 12 No. 4 bedroom detached houses(187.8sq.m), 12 No. 4 bedroom detached houses (234.1sq.m) & 11 No. 5 bedroom detached houses (282.6 sq.m) all of the above houses to be provided with detached garages (25.0sq.m). Existing former stable and outbuilding stuctures to be altered and extended to provide 5 No. 2-storey dwelling houses, including 2 No. 3 bedroom terrace houses (124.1sq.m & 131.3sq.m) & 3 No. 2 bedroom terrace houses (107.8sq.m, 104.5sq.m & 95.1sq.m). All of the above works to be undertaken complete with 2 new site entrances to Maypark Lane, car parking, demolition of existing structures, internal access roads, landscaping, reinstatement of existing pond and all associated site works"

Just what we need more houses and apartments, lovely
:rolleyes:

Partizan

wellbutty wrote: »

Sorry to disappoint you Dayshah but Glanbia put the following in for planning last week:

"a residential development comprising 40 No. 2-storey detached and terraced dwelling houses, associated works and works to improve woodland public open space. Accomodation will consist of 12 No. 4 bedroom detached houses(187.8sq.m), 12 No. 4 bedroom detached houses (234.1sq.m) & 11 No. 5 bedroom detached houses (282.6 sq.m) all of the above houses to be provided with detached garages (25.0sq.m). Existing former stable and outbuilding stuctures to be altered and extended to provide 5 No. 2-storey dwelling houses, including 2 No. 3 bedroom terrace houses (124.1sq.m & 131.3sq.m) & 3 No. 2 bedroom terrace houses (107.8sq.m, 104.5sq.m & 95.1sq.m). All of the above works to be undertaken complete with 2 new site entrances to Maypark Lane, car parking, demolition of existing structures, internal access roads, landscaping, reinstatement of existing pond and all associated site works"

Alot of the proposed developments in that glossy brochure will never go ahead, i.e. North Quays Development, Old Foundary development. The last thing we need are more useless white elephant apartments and shopping centres. They got a couple of professional photographers, went around the city to take from snazzy pics so that it would look good but no matter what way you dress it up Waterford city has many underlying problems - unemployment, bad planning, crime.

The money would be best spent on improving and providing integrated public transport (regular buses & proper train services) bus and cycle lanes and nature parks.

dayshah

I listened to WLR about the park. One thing I didn't hear mentioned was flooding on the Tramore Road.

Maybe the trees and ponds they install will allow more soakage, and reduce flooding?

Partizan

dayshah wrote: »

I listened to WLR about the park. One thing I didn't hear mentioned was flooding on the Tramore Road.

Maybe the trees and ponds they install will allow more soakage, and reduce flooding?

The raising of the Tramore Road will move the floodwaters into the city - Manor area. They should have deepened the St. Johns River along the road and further out to Blackrock to take the excess volume of water.

The old dump is useless for building on so it was logical that it be turned into a nature park, now what should happen is for the whole Kilbarry bogs to be turned into a protected nature reserve.

gscully

RobitTV wrote: »

Next Spring will see the opening of a €4m nature park in the city.

The initiative will leave Waterford with one of the largest urban parklands in the country and create an urban oasis covering the equivalent to more than three times the area of the city’s People’s Park.

Two contractors are due on site at the end of April to finalise details of car parking facilities, while landscapers have been appointed and the design will go to tender this year.

Access into the park will be available for vehicles at an entrance by Kingfisher Leisure Centre, with pedestrian access available near-by also. A car park will be provided in a location that doesn’t interfere with the parkland.

Speaking at Waterford City Council’s monthly meeting last night, Cllr Cha O’Neill asked that another access point be made available as he said it was very far away for people on the top of the town to access it.

Colette Byrne, Director of Environmental Services and Planning, said that from a security point of view only one entrance would be open at the beginning.

Somewhere in Viewmount, a certain somebody is mast***ating furiously while reading ths news

hardybuck

The whole Dunmore Rd situation is a total disgrace. About 15,000 people live out there and there are little or no green spaces. Having lived in Dublin I can see that a situation like that would never be allowed there, and you'd expect the opposite there in a built up city.

What annoys me more are housing estates where planning permission forced developers to put some green in the centre, and residents associations ask them to put either a huge hill, rocks or trees all over it so nobody could ever possibly play on it. Nazis!

merlante

hardybuck wrote: »

The whole Dunmore Rd situation is a total disgrace. About 15,000 people live out there and there are little or no green spaces. Having lived in Dublin I can see that a situation like that would never be allowed there, and you'd expect the opposite there in a built up city.

What annoys me more are housing estates where planning permission forced developers to put some green in the centre, and residents associations ask them to put either a huge hill, rocks or trees all over it so nobody could ever possibly play on it. Nazis!

The outskirts of Dublin city are pretty much identical in terms of housing type, green space, etc., to Waterford and pretty much any other town or city.

It's the inner cities where things were done right in the past (e.g. People's park, Stephen's green). Public parks had their heyday in the victorian and georgian eras, now we favour gardens, front and back, estates and greens.

Incidentally there is a green space out near Tesco, just in case you missed it.

merlante

Partizan wrote: »

Alot of the proposed developments in that glossy brochure will never go ahead, i.e. North Quays Development, Old Foundary development. The last thing we need are more useless white elephant apartments and shopping centres.

Well considering, of all places, Waterford built absolutely no white elephant developments at all. Railway sq. is the closest, and that is partially occupied and came in very useful during the Penny's redevelopment. Thanks to McCann et al, that is one thing that we do not need to worry about. God forbid we would have torn down our lovely rotting north quays and replaced it with something that would be empty for years, that would definitely have neen a disaster... :rolleyes:

The one development that Waterford really needs is the Newgate centre. Everything else can wait until some future point where we actually have money again.

dayshah

merlante wrote: »

The outskirts of Dublin city are pretty much identical in terms of housing type, green space, etc., to Waterford and pretty much any other town or city.

It's the inner cities where things were done right in the past (e.g. People's park, Stephen's green). Public parks had their heyday in the victorian and georgian eras, now we favour gardens, front and back, estates and greens.

Incidentally there is a green space out near Tesco, just in case you missed it.

I agree with that. Though I understand why people want a garden, I'm not a big fan of these green areas in housing estates. I think it would have been better planning if the green areas from several estates were combined into a public park, but its too late now

hardybuck

Take a drive through residential areas of Dublin and open your eyes next time. I lived in Glasnevin, an area similar in size to the Dunmore Rd. Across the road from my house was a large park about 3/4 the size of People's Park, which had a GAA pitch, four soccer pitches, six tennis courts and a large amount of wooded area and walking trails.

Within 15 mins walk was the National Botanic Gardens, Addison Park, Ellenfield Park, Griffith Park, Johnstown Park and Poppintree Park. The Phoenix Park is the largest urban parkland in Europe, and you've also got huge demenses scattered around the outskirts.

The same pattern can be seen across Dublin, where they seem to have had a policy which they put in place in contrast to 'build now and worry about the problems later' attitude on the Dunmore Rd area.

Look at the Granstown Park area out to Ballygunner where houses were built and it took about 15 years to put in footpaths and street lighting.

That little patch out in Williamstown is about the size of my back garden, and is for the Grange area, which also has a big population. Too little too late.

Cabaal

hardybuck wrote: »

Take a drive through residential areas of Dublin and open your eyes next time. I lived in Glasnevin, an area similar in size to the Dunmore Rd. Across the road from my house was a large park about 3/4 the size of People's Park, which had a GAA pitch, four soccer pitches, six tennis courts and a large amount of wooded area and walking trails.

Within 15 mins walk was the National Botanic Gardens, Addison Park, Ellenfield Park, Griffith Park, Johnstown Park and Poppintree Park. The Phoenix Park is the largest urban parkland in Europe, and you've also got huge demenses scattered around the outskirts.

Lovely, now which of these parks and things like the Botanic Gardens were designed and build since Ireland became a republic? The majority of what your listing has existed since Victorian times or during the time when the english owned Ireland.

[EDIT]
Lets see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Botanic_Gardens_%28Ireland%29 - Opened 1795
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Park - Opened 1662

Hardly planned and designed by the Irish goverment are they?

The same pattern can be seen across Dublin, where they seem to have had a policy which they put in place in contrast to 'build now and worry about the problems later' attitude on the Dunmore Rd area.

Thats debatable, see my point above
The same pattern exists in Dublin because it was a larger city back in those times and as such more parks were designed

You can't claim old designing and planning not even carried out by the Irish goverment against current Irish planning, its clearly not the same thing

hardybuck

Well if you justify our lack of parks due to the fact that any parks in Ireland were built or designed before the Irish Republic was founded, was Waterford not in existence in this period or what were they doing? Seems like we've been doing things backward for generations then.

If Dublin City Council didn't design or implement them, they certainly made sure they were well looked after, and not built over. It would have been easy to concrete over every single one of them.

You can't seriously defend our poor planning policy. One example is the old playing fields where Grange Cove stands today. It was owned by DLS College, and the only place you could play football. They sold it and more houses were shoved in there. The City Council should have stepped in and prevented this.

hardybuck

Cabaal wrote: »

Lovely, now which of these parks and things like the Botanic Gardens were designed and build since Ireland became a republic? The majority of what your listing has existed since Victorian times or during the time when the english owned Ireland.

[EDIT]
Lets see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Botanic_Gardens_%28Ireland%29 - Opened 1795
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Park - Opened 1662
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffith_Park - Opened 1896

Hardly planned and designed by the Irish goverment are they?

Thats debatable, see my point above
The same pattern exists in Dublin because it was a larger city back in those times and as such more parks were designed

You can't claim old designing and planning not even carried out by the Irish goverment against current Irish planning, its clearly not the same thing

That Griffith Park you've mentioned was certainly not planned and designed by the Irish Government. I can be sure of this as its located in the Los Feliz subarb of Los Angeles. Don't think we can take credit for that one!

merlante

hardybuck wrote: »

Well if you justify our lack of parks due to the fact that any parks in Ireland were built or designed before the Irish Republic was founded, was Waterford not in existence in this period or what were they doing? Seems like we've been doing things backward for generations then.

If Dublin City Council didn't design or implement them, they certainly made sure they were well looked after, and not built over. It would have been easy to concrete over every single one of them.

You can't seriously defend our poor planning policy. One example is the old playing fields where Grange Cove stands today. It was owned by DLS College, and the only place you could play football. They sold it and more houses were shoved in there. The City Council should have stepped in and prevented this.

Cabaal pretty much made the point I've been making, that these parks were all built pre-1900.

Waterford had a population of between 20-25,000 from the late 18th century till 1900. The land use was about 25% of what is there now. The people's park was actually an appropriate provision in terms of public parks for the time (even though it wasn't turned over to the public until the late 19th century iirc.). Also, the proximity of the countryside, and beaches, etc., to the city was such that there wouldn't have been any compelling reason to build parks. Dublin, even then, was an order of magnitude larger than Waterford.

The issue is that so many of the amenities we have taken for granted as being essentially public amenities are actually in the private hands of religious orders, that got very interested in cashing in on them when they discovered they were going to have to cough up a huge chunk of change for abuse victims. St. John's college is another example of a fantastic building and green space destined, at one point anyway, for apartments. The council does not have the resources to purchase and redevelop land on this scale. Even regenerating the park took about 5 years and costed €2m.

My solution to the problem is to maintain a higher density of urban development, get rid of front gardens (at least), driveways and greens, and go back to building systems of streets with local parks. Estates full of cul-de-sacs with poor use of space, where 80% of gardens probably aren't even maintained makes public transport and public parks unviable. That just my opinion!

merlante

As an aside, the Phoenix park when it was built/walled off was about the same distance away from the city centre as Mt. Congreve is from Waterford, and Dublin was probably about the same size or smaller than Waterford at that time...

Cabaal

hardybuck wrote: »

That Griffith Park you've mentioned was certainly not planned and designed by the Irish Government. I can be sure of this as its located in the Los Feliz subarb of Los Angeles. Don't think we can take credit for that one!

Apologises for that one, simple mistake

comeraghs

Mt Congreve will be some asset when it is open to the public. please god they won´t make a hames of it!

mike65

merlante wrote: »

My solution to the problem is to maintain a higher density of urban development, get rid of front gardens (at least), driveways and greens, and go back to building systems of streets with local parks. Estates full of cul-de-sacs with poor use of space, where 80% of gardens probably aren't even maintained makes public transport and public parks unviable. That just my opinion!

Flooding ahoy! Every garden helps stop runoff during heavy weather and every garden is a potential oasis of quiet and calm for wildlife. I like gardens the only thing thats wrong with many they are in the possession of lazy sods who cover them over.

dayshah

mike65 wrote: »

Flooding ahoy! Every garden helps stop runoff during heavy weather and every garden is a potential oasis of quiet and calm for wildlife. I like gardens the only thing thats wrong with many they are in the possession of lazy sods who cover them over.

No flooding if we maintain the same amount of green area. So if every house would have 100 sq m of garden, and there are 200 houses, pool it together to get a nice park of 20,000 sq m. Also put this park at the bottom, so if it gets flooded its not too bad, the plants will recover. I'd like to have a back garden myself, but I don't see the point of a front garden.

merlante

dayshah wrote: »

No flooding if we maintain the same amount of green area. So if every house would have 100 sq m of garden, and there are 200 houses, pool it together to get a nice park of 20,000 sq m. Also put this park at the bottom, so if it gets flooded its not too bad, the plants will recover. I'd like to have a back garden myself, but I don't see the point of a front garden.

This is exactly the point. You actually free up marginally more space than all the gardens combined. Plus public transport and a huge number of other services are more efficient to provide, so you can actually pay someone to maintain the park(s). In the past, the city employed a man to live in and maintain the people's park. In the 21st century with twice the population we can't afford it. Why? Because of unsustainable development. The council has to look after four times the surface area for only twice the population.

Besides, we have such a thing as drains in cities.

mike65

Only if the drians are properly maintained.

Yes Boss

The public parks would require 24 hour security so that it would not be taken over by delinquents!!

merlante

Yes Boss wrote: »

The public parks would require 24 hour security so that it would not be taken over by delinquents!!

Well, the people's park is not taken over by delinquents... notwithstanding recent problems. Besides, the city used to be able to pay some guy to live there -- at a time when Waterford had twice the population density.

Besides, I know a few people who's back gardens are nearly taken over by delinquents.