It must be clearly stated that this submission is considered a preliminary submission and can only be read and considered as a feasibility academic exercise that is totally dependent on the findings of a full archaeological investigation. My submission may fundamentally change depending on the findings of future investigation.
Enya Kennedy
4.2.2 The Archeological strategy is to be welcomed but is too narrow and should be extended to the whole of the site and Kilkenny as a whole. The revisioning process identified archeology as of the utmost importance on this site and this has not been reflected through this process. Comprehensive archeological investigations should be completed at the first stage of the development before any other construction is done on the site.
The Phasing of the plan does not allow for the correct Archeological investigations to take place. Archeological investigations should take place at stage 1 not Stage 2.
Stabilisation works to St Francis Abbey, the City wall and Evans Turret should be completed as part of stage 1 to ensure the intregity of these National Monuments before any further works take place on the site
The HGV traffic management plan has not been considered as part of the movement strategy so therefore is incomplete and is not ready for insertion to a final Masterplan
The movement strategy should be informed by the Archeological investigations and the Burgage plots therefore this strategy is premature and should not be considered at this time
The proposed "street" through the site is measured at 14 metres the bridge at the Bregagh is only 10 metres, so the Road should be no wider than 10 metres, this needs to be rectified before the Masterplan is put on a statuatory footing.
The view from Michael Street to St Francis Abbey should be included as a protected view.
3.1.2 Context of the Study Area, states that vehicular access is restricted primarily to the main entrance from Parliment Street. A secondary vehicular access point lies on the southern boundary of the site to the rear of the courthouse with access from Bateman Quay, it is my submission that the "retention" and extention of the Mayfair will effectively close off the entrace to the site from Parliment Street and therefore as I have previously submitted the Mayfair Building should be demolished to allow for proper access to the site.
The previous Masterplan had the statement "Extend the Medieval Character of the streetscapes in the city centre into the site" this has been removed and should be reinstated before this document is put on a Statutory footing.
All archeology should be done on the site before any futher work is considered and should inform what can be done with the site.
I believe that this plan is not yet ready for adoption on a statuatory footing, I have attended the public consultations and previously submitted in writing on the Masterplan and I feel that the wishes and views of the public have not been taken into consideration,
I object to the Abbey Creative Quarter Masterplan being voted on as stands, I object in principle because of the following
The site has not yet had been signed off by the EPA and is therefore not decommissioned and signed over to the county council so it is therefore premature.
There is no urgency for the plan to be rushed through in terms of funding as it has been confirmed by Martin Prenderville that there is in excess of 6 Billion euro available ISIF projects.
Deputy John Deasy has also questioned in the PAC why the monies have not been drawn down, without careful consideration of the terms and conditions attached to the ISIF funds this would be considered to be irresponsible.
I also note that the ISIF funding is limited in scope and cannot be used for projects that will cause displacement of Jobs, have a “Deadweight” benefit or Additionality of jobs.
With a new CEO and senior executive team coming in to position in the next few weeks it is only right and proper that they get to analyse and evaluate the existing masterplan and and proposed variations to the County Development plan as they will be responsible for delivering these projects. I believe that it would be irresponsible of the County Councillors to vote on this draft plan at this stage.
At this stage the Masterplan is too vague to be voted on, once it is incorporated into the Kilkenny City and Environs Development plan it then is no longer an “aspirational” document but one that has statutory footing and is legally binding, the document needs much more work before it can be incorporated.
To date there has been a very high level of public engagement in terms of consultation both through engagement in the re-visioning workshops and written submission, unfortunately the recommendations from the public do not seem to be taken on board the new version of the Masterplan See Re-visioning document for details. For example the resounding opinion of the public which included Councillors Business people and citizens alike had an almost unanimous view that there should be a comprehensive archaeological excavation on the site, however the terms of reference of the Archaeological strategy set out by the executive falls far short of this and contains the excavation to 3 specific areas of the site.
It is a recommendation of the re-visioning document produced by the planning department see page number 76 recommendation number 5 that "The proposed Variation to the City and Environs Development plan will not commence until the Masterplan for the area has been finalised and approved by elected members of Kilkenny County Council, this process is not following that recommendation and is therefore flawed. I submit that this recommendation should be followed
Footnote 63 of document named Proposed Variation No.1 of Kilkenny City and Environs Development plan 2014-2020 puts the Masterplan on a statutory footing and this again goes against recommendation No.5 of the Re-Visioning document.
I conclude that it is irresponsible to vote on this Masterplan document at this time, it should be deemed unwise and irresponsible to vote on a plan of this scale which will have have such a significant bearing on this generation and for many generations to come without much more discussion, consultation and the exact implications of any such vote, it is rare that such a plan would come before any council and caution, due process, deep and careful consideration of the implications of the plan should be at the forefront of each of the Councillors minds when voting on this.
1. Sweeneys Orchard (The Gardens) - This part of the site is owned by Kilkenny County Council and as such can be developed appropirately at anytime, the housing as suggested is a good idea but needs reconfiguration to integrate the housing to the existing Green Street and Vicar Street communities, the entrances to these sites already exist from Greensbridge and Vicar Street, I submit that it should also be considered to put a micro brewery on this part of the site as it is not part of the Diagio Contract and 2 breweries have already expressed interest in establishing a brewery and creating much needed jobs on this part of the site.
3. The Brewery - There is significant historical and archeoligical interest on this part of the site, full archeological investigations of this part of the site should be completed and the stabilisation works be completed before any futher work is done, any archeological finds should dictate the Urban plan for this part of the site.
4. The Market Yard - The Market yard part of the site has only been part of the process since June 2015, as such there has not been any chance to properly consult with the public on this part, and this needs further public consultation before this plan can be adopted. Consideration for Archeology should also be considered for this part of the site before any futher plans are considered.
Linear Park Strategy
I submit that the Linear park concept needs futher work before adoption, Full archeological investigations need to be completed before the work is commenced on the park.
The park is too narrow at 15 Metres it should be closer to 30 metres
There needs to be specific protection for the only part of the site that has wildlife at the Poplar trees, the Park should start back from these trees to protect the swans and any other wildlife that is living there.
Full Archeological investigation needs to be completed at phase one of the plan as does the stabilisation works to the protected monuments on the site.
This work should inform the next stages of development of the site anything else is premature.
It was stated at the County Council meeting of Monday 20th July 2015 that a commitment was made by the Borough Council to accommodate a rink for minority sports in the Brewery site, I submit that this should be investigated further before this plan is adopted, the idea was given unanimous support by the elected members of the council.
The plan for a skate park has disappeared from the site this should also be defined before the plan is finalised.