I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
Private Business. - Local Government Provisional Order Confirmation Bill, 1979: Second Stage.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
The purpose of the Bill is to give effect to the County Borough of Waterford (Extension of Boundary) Provisional Order, 1979, which was made by the Minister on 8 November last. The order provides for the extension of the boundary of the city of Waterford to take in an area of County Waterford comprising some 7,544 acres approximately.
The procedure for altering the boundary of Waterford city is governed by section 36 of the Waterford City Management Act, 1939. A petition by Waterford Corporation under this Act was made to the Minister on 22 May this year. A local inquiry was held on 4 September last. Waterford County Council and Corporation were both represented at the inquiry and all other interested parties were afforded an opportunity to express their views. There were no objections to the proposed extension at the public hearing. The proposed extension had already been agreed to by both the corporation and the county council. The inspector in his report on the inquiry recommended that the proposed extension should go ahead without modification. The Minister having considered this report and the inspector's recommendation and the agreement between the local authorities concerned has approved the extension as proposed without modification.
It is hoped to have the present legislation enacted before the Christmas Recess so that the extension will come into force as from 1 January 1980; this, being the beginning of the financial year, is the date most suitable for both the local authorities and the date which will cause least inconvenience for all concerned.
The main case made by Waterford Corporation in support of their petition was that the existing area of the city—2,613 acres—was totally inadequate to meet development needs. Of this area only 84 acres is capable of further development. In addition, the built-up area of the city has already spilled over its present boundary. A form of ribbon development has arisen on the arterial routes including not only residential development but also commercial and industrial development. At present, in the immediate environs of the city there are planning permissions for residential development in excess of 1,300 acres. Since 1973 the corporation have been obliged to purchase over 600 acres outside the city in order to satisfy their house building programme. In recent years the designation of Waterford as a regional growth centre and the realisation of this with expanding industrial development has also emphasised the need for the expansion of the city.
The area to be added to the city under the provisional orders is contiguous to the existing city boundary and includes the electoral divisions of Ballynakill, Killoteran, Kilbarry and Waterford Rural. They all form a coherent unit and can be related to a convenient boundary. Apart from an extension in 1966 which added some 520 acres to the city and minor extensions in 1944 and 1955 the boundary of Waterford city has remained unchanged since 1896.
As I already mentioned, Waterford County Council have accepted the need for the proposed extension and agreement has been reached between the city and county authorities on all aspects of the matter including a financial settlement.
The order also contains a number of provisions which are consequential on the extension. These are along the usual lines and provide for the preparation of official maps of the extended city area, the continuation in effect of resolutions and orders, as appropriate, arrangements in regard to the register of electors, employment and hours of trading orders and development plans. I understand that the corporation are busy preparing a new development plan for the added area which will be put on display as soon as the extension is effective.
I commend the Bill to the House and I would like to ask for the co-operation of Senators in ensuring that it will have a speedy passage so that the boundary extension can become effective on 1 January next.
I can assure the Minister that as far as this party are concerned the Bill will have a speedy passage. It is very hard to keep yourself out of anything. It would be impossible for me to keep myself out of the extension of Waterford County Borough having been born under the mental hospital clock in Waterford a considerable time ago, which may have accounted for a good deal. I had an uncle who used to say in a vague kind of way, looking at a ruin, "a very historical kind of place", which meant he absolutely knew nothing about it except that he had been told various things by people which he had since forgotten. There is no doubt about the historical nature of that great city. I have a very great pride in having been born in a city that was given the motto of urbs intacta. It was given that by Henry VII I believe. I recollect it as an urbs intacta as I wandered through the streets which are in the present county borough and the territory which is now being taken into the county borough which I understand to be along the Cork, Tramore and Dunmore roads, which I know very well. I owe a great debt to that place in which I lived until the attainment of adulthood.
It is useful in regard to the information that the Minister has given the House to give some additional figures to inform the Senators broadly my understanding of the effect of enacting this Bill. The present acreage, the Minister has said, is 2,613 acres. The extension, which is in the Waterford area only at this stage—there is a further development planned—is that to the figure of 2,613 acres are added 7,544 acres, giving a new figure of 10,157 acres. That is an extension which is almost a multiplier of four of the present boundaries. The population, however, increases quite modestly, according to the estimates that I have, from the existing population within that county borough of 32,600 by 4,650, which is just over 10 per cent, to 37,250.
All this, as the Minister said, has been agreed with Waterford County Council. One of the reasons why we should all have some enthusiasm here is that there has been full agreement between the borough and the county council. That is very important. The valuation of the city properties is £177,418. It is to be increased by £23,640 to a new total of £201,058. Perhaps an explanation for the ease with which agreement was reached is that they are doing the transition of business from the extension of the county borough into the county to spread it over a period of three years. It is only going to add 71p in the £ spread over three years to the rates bills of the new people who are being taken into the city. This is a very moderate increase on what these people are paying to the council on their old rates. We all know that private residences are free from the burden of rates.
This does not affect the position of dwellinghouses except, curiously, it will provide a relief to the citizens of Waterford, because at the moment they are paying £17 a year for water rates. That will disappear, as I understand the provisions of what is being enacted. It is interesting that this will take only three years, whereas the Drogheda extension is spread over a period of 15 years because of the considerable differential between what the people in the country areas around Drogheda were paying before the extension of Drogheda compared to what they would have to pay as ratepayers of Drogheda.
I welcome this Bill. I would love to give you the splendid account of the various instructions I received in the city of Waterford and the various towns which I went to see.
I would like to welcome the Bill and take the opportunity to congratulate the people of Waterford for their good timing and good sense of planning which enabled them to have enough land available to be in a position to produce houses at the lowest cost in the country. Any further development along these lines with that kind of foresight I would be happy to support.
I am grateful for Senator FitzGerald's good humoured intervention and his experience of the Minister for the Environment's proposals in relation to the Bill, and his references to my opening statement in particular. The Senator's figures are accurate in relation to the population. The estimated population of the added area from the 1979 census is 4,860, so the population of Waterford city before the extension was 32,617 and the addition of the 4,860 gives you a figure of 37,477.
In relation to the acreage, the existing area of Waterford city is 2,613 acres which is made up as follows: developed land, 1,839 acres, undeveloped land, 84 acres, undevelopable land, 500 acres and river and mud, 190 acres. The area being added on to Waterford city is, as I stated in my opening remarks, 7,544 acres which is made up as follows: land, 6,994 acres, river and mud, 550 acres.
The Senator gave the example of Drogheda and the fact that the difference between the rates paid by the city and the county in that instance will be made up over a 15-year period. His analysis of the reason for the 15-year period in the Drogheda example is correct. In the case of Waterford, the people will be asked to make up the difference between the city and the county over a three-year period. I would like to thank the Senators for their contributions to the Bill.
Question put and agreed to.
Agreed to take remaining Stages today.