Brendan McCann at it again

Max Powers

Yes everybody has right to object but he has clearly abused the system for his own agenda. 99.9% of Waterford people wanted Newgate Centre to go ahead and still do I would guess. He delayed it (with a couple of others in this case) and now we missed the opportunity to compete with other weekend destinations on the retail factor.

McCann has objected to things that have practically no relevance to him or jobs so small, its ridiculous to object to. He has also said publicly that he would object to anything that a certain person hopes to do. This is not the talk of a man concerned about his local environment but a person with a grudge against a certain person, possibly people or city.
If he was so concerned about what we are doing to the country, why hasnt he made objections in his home county of galway or why stop there, what about the whole country?

McCann has become adept at stopping or delaying these projects, delays cost money in the real world, no application is 100% perfect as by the nature of construction, there is gonna be some disturbance to someone close to project be it some temporary noise, extra traffic, etc (all reasons he used in the past).

In conclusion, he is abusing the system for his own entertainment at the people of Waterford's expense. His actions are akin to shouting 'bomb' on a crowded bus, completely irresponsible.

viking2011

Max Powers wrote: »

Yes everybody has right to object but he has clearly abused the system for his own agenda. 99.9% of Waterford people wanted Newgate Centre to go ahead and still do I would guess. He delayed it (with a couple of others in this case) and now we missed the opportunity to compete with other weekend destinations on the retail factor.

McCann has objected to things that have practically no relevance to him or jobs so small, its ridiculous to object to. He has also said publicly that he would object to anything that a certain person hopes to do. This is not the talk of a man concerned about his local environment but a person with a grudge against a certain person, possibly people or city.
If he was so concerned about what we are doing to the country, why hasnt he made objections in his home county of galway or why stop there, what about the whole country?

McCann has become adept at stopping or delaying these projects, delays cost money in the real world, no application is 100% perfect as by the nature of construction, there is gonna be some disturbance to someone close to project be it some temporary noise, extra traffic, etc (all reasons he used in the past).

In conclusion, he is abusing the system for his own entertainment at the people of Waterford's expense. His actions are akin to shouting 'bomb' on a crowded bus, completely irresponsible.

this guy a freaked our most developers country wide, Waterford has a reputation to be hard to get planning permission. So most developers avoid us like the plague, thanks to Mr McCant

Yes Boss

Max Powers wrote: »

does anyone have any suggestions for stopping McCann. Im talking about people power, putting pressure on him etc. before its suggested, non-violent means only boys and girls.

You can submit a positive observation on the same application that he is objecting to. Planning observations/objections don't have to be negative.

Yes Boss

dayshah wrote: »

Yes, you can turn the country into a dictatorship and eliminate freedom of speach. Its not really worth much if you only have the freedom to say whats popular.

The planning process already has safeguards against vexatious objections. His objections cause delays as they are usually upheld.

Can you let us know what these safeguards are exactly? Any Planner that I have spoken to over the years say the same thing - Planning observations/objections NEVER contain the real reason why a person is objecting. They disguise it in Planning parlance i.e. Archeological significance, undesirable precedent, contrary to proper/sustainable planning and development. How can any applicant defend against that?

dayshah

Max Powers wrote: »

McCann has become adept at stopping or delaying these projects, delays cost money in the real world, no application is 100% perfect as by the nature of construction, there is gonna be some disturbance to someone close to project be it some temporary noise, extra traffic, etc (all reasons he used in the past).

In conclusion, he is abusing the system for his own entertainment at the people of Waterford's expense. His actions are akin to shouting 'bomb' on a crowded bus, completely irresponsible.

Then why are the majority of his objections upheld? Also, he is seldom the sole objector. Developers must take responsibility for submitting reasonable plans, including any preparatory works.

Did you ever even look at the Newgate plans? Yes a shopping centre would be nice. But Newgate was not just a shopping centre. It was a Bubble-era white elephant project complete with "luxury" apartments, 5* hotel, ugly wood panelling, and lets not forget the Bubble-era trademark: a spa and leisure centre.

If it had gone ahead it would probably have run out of finance mid-way, making Michael St look like Baghdad.

If its such a good proposal, why won't anyone finance it.

The planning process in the country was a total mess. Luckily Brendan McCann saved us from its worst excesses.

Aarnikotka

dayshah wrote: »

Then why are the majority of his objections upheld?

Are they though? Can you give me some examples? From what I gather, most of his objections were dismissed (unfortunately after lengthy periods of time as a result of the nature of the planning process). The reasons the projects then didn't go ahead (the most famous perhaps being Newgate & Bilberry) is because the developers ran out of time/money.

dayshah

Aarnikotka wrote: »

Are they though? Can you give me some examples? From what I gather, most of his objections were dismissed (unfortunately after lengthy periods of time as a result of the nature of the planning process). The reasons the projects then didn't go ahead (the most famous perhaps being Newgate & Bilberry) is because the developers ran out of time/money.

Erm, how exactly can they cause delays if the objections are thrown out?

Also how did Newgate or Bilberry run out of time? Armageddon isn't beckoning. The place hasn't been eroded. There is still plenty of time to do it.

What they ran out of was boom-time. Not many people will invest in a 5* hotel in a city with amongst the lowest hotel rates in Western Europe.

They have to go back to the drawing board and design a proper shopping centre, without all that spa and leisure centre crap.

viking2011

dayshah wrote: »

Erm, how exactly can they cause delays if the objections are thrown out?

Also how did Newgate or Bilberry run out of time? Armageddon isn't beckoning. The place hasn't been eroded. There is still plenty of time to do it.

What they ran out of was boom-time. Not many people will invest in a 5* hotel in a city with amongst the lowest hotel rates in Western Europe.

They have to go back to the drawing board and design a proper shopping centre, without all that spa and leisure centre crap.

the reason for the "spa and leisure centre crap" and hotel and appartments etc is because of planning - you need to build a mixed use development to get planning and keep locals happy - these guy only want to build a shopping centre
the reason they "ran our of money" is because of 3-4 years in Planning"

dayshah

viking2011 wrote: »

the reason they "ran our of money" is because of 3-4 years in Planning"

Why, had they a full building crew on standby??

There is no requirement for mixed use developments. Plenty of single use developments get planning.

I don't remember McCann entering an objection based on the absence of a spa and leisure centre :rolleyes:

fuzzy dunlop

dayshah wrote: »

Erm, how exactly can they cause delays if the objections are thrown out?

Also how did Newgate or Bilberry run out of time? Armageddon isn't beckoning. The place hasn't been eroded. There is still plenty of time to do it.

What they ran out of was boom-time. Not many people will invest in a 5* hotel in a city with amongst the lowest hotel rates in Western Europe.

They have to go back to the drawing board and design a proper shopping centre, without all that spa and leisure centre crap.

Tell me something.How do you know Waterford has the lowest hotel rates in Western Europe? I'm just curious as I happen to know that this is absolute tosh.We probably have the worst value for money hotels on the Island of Ireland never mind Western Europe.Add to the fact that they are an inferior standard to what is typically on offer in Kilkenny or Wexford.

This spa and leisure centre crap as you call it are standard fare in any hotel worth it's salt in this day and age. We can pour all the money we want into the Viking Triangle and any other cultural amenity it will be worthlless if there is no proper hotel accomodation with proper conference facilities.As for the Newgate development as a whole if it was constructed and operating right now we would still be only holding our own in the region but why acknowledge this when you can throw around stupid buzz words like "White elepant and boom time this and that" when the truth is the complete contrary.

Ask yourself this? How many developments that finally got through the planning process did McCann finally approve of thereby removing his objections.The answer is none. So the contention that most of his objections were upheld is horse sh1t.Also if McCann was the benign influence you suppose he was why was there not one single objection to the Ferrybank or Butlerstown developments the very antithesis of good planning and sustainable development.

dayshah

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Tell me something.How do you know Waterford has the lowest hotel rates in Western Europe? I'm just curious as I happen to know that this is absolute tosh.We probably have the worst value for money hotels on the Island of Ireland never mind Western Europe.

Here you go:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0321/hotel-business.html

So, hey, want to go halves on developing a 5* hotel??

fuzzy dunlop

dayshah wrote: »

Here you go:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0321/hotel-business.html

So, hey, want to go halves on developing a 5* hotel??

Yeah Let's develop a five star hotel. Because this is the reason Waterford has the cheapest hotels in Ireland.It doesn't have any five star hotels and only one four star hotel (no thanks to McCann) which are standard fare now, unlike Kilkenny or Wexford or most other parts of the country which aren't dumb enough to object to developments that enhance their tourist industry.You can't compare the Maryland to White's hotel in Wexford (which is how the survey was conducted by the looks of things) and say we have the cheapest hotels in Ireland.

Remember the stink we kicked up over not being included in this.This is the legacy of Brendan McCann on our city.

http://www.munster-express.ie/business/fury-over-city%E2%80%99s-omission-from-official-website/

Hoffmans

Max Powers wrote: »

Yes everybody has right to object but he has clearly abused the system for his own agenda. 99.9% of Waterford people wanted Newgate Centre to go ahead and still do I would guess. He delayed it (with a couple of others in this case) and now we missed the opportunity to compete with other weekend destinations on the retail factor.

.

get out in the fresh air a little more and see the amount of empty units lying idle around the city centre -thats the retail fact or

honeybadger

brown envelopes and the lack of cash that was in them his way ,,little apple will grow again not in my books

seanybiker

Fook it. Nothing we can do bout it

dayshah

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Yeah Let's develop a five star hotel. Because this is the reason Waterford has the cheapest hotels in Ireland.It doesn't have any five star hotels and only one four star hotel (no thanks to McCann) which are standard fare now, unlike Kilkenny or Wexford or most other parts of the country which aren't dumb enough to object to developments that enhance their tourist industry.You can't compare the Maryland to White's hotel in Wexford (which is how the survey was conducted by the looks of things) and say we have the cheapest hotels in Ireland.

Remember the stink we kicked up over not being included in this.This is the legacy of Brendan McCann on our city.

http://www.munster-express.ie/business/fury-over-city%E2%80%99s-omission-from-official-website/

Sure, the hotel industry across Ireland is on its knees due to over capacity.

And your solution? Build another hotel

Here is the report if you wish to educate yourself.
http://www.hotels.com/press/hotel-price-index.html
The solution is to bring in more tourists. Tourists won't visit Waterford for a spa and leisure centre, they will come because of the unique things we have to offer. You know, the sort of things McCann is trying to protect.

Cabaal

dayshah wrote: »

Sure, the hotel industry across Ireland is on its knees due to over capacity.

And your solution? Build another hotel

Here is the report if you wish to educate yourself.
http://www.hotels.com/press/hotel-price-index.html
The solution is to bring in more tourists. Tourists won't visit Waterford for a spa and leisure centre, they will come because of the unique things we have to offer. You know, the sort of things McCann is trying to protect.

Have to agree with this,
If you look at the likes of American's they don't want expensive hotels (and yes a 5 star will be expensive) they want history and attractions to visit.

If you look at Wexford it has loads of locations to visit, Kilkenny also and it does an excellent job of advertising itself however while Waterford has the history such as vikings, walled city etc however for years Waterford has affectively sat on its hands and done nothing to promote anything in the city instead just relying on "the glass" so all in all a very complacent attitude.

Up until this year nothing was made of the history of the Irish flag in Waterford yet it could be made into a mini-festival if handled/funded right and promoted correctly and thumbs up to the people that finally organised something this year, additionally anything Viking isn't made a thing of either. Instead tourists have to go to Dublin for a Viking experience or atleast thats the perception for them.

Now 5 star hotels do serve a purpose but more so in a conference way, thats what makes the likes of Kilkenny City attractive to companys and organisations wishing to have AGM's etc and thats brings in people into the city which generates more revenue for everyone.

However as rightly pointed out right now there's an oversupply of hotels, Kilkenny and Wexford already have stuff built but the solution to Waterford is not to throw more money into a hotel in the form of a 5 star with the hopes that that will fix everything, it won't because the problems are far wider then that.

In many respects whilst I can understand why people dislike McCann much of his objections are on very valid grounds and he's backed up on this for the very fact that the objections have been successful.

Its interesting to think that people will bitch about all the developments that were built throughout Ireland during the "boom" and much of these were ill-thought out, you never know in a few years you may be thankful that McCann saved Waterford from such ill-thought out developments. Hey I could be wrong but its worth keeping that in mind

ziedth

Ok I have a question, are there any big developments that he DIDN'T object too? If the argument that if people did their planning right and there would be no problem is true then surely at some points plans went up that he was even happy with? (Not in WIT for obvious reasons)

dayshah

ziedth wrote: »

Ok I have a question, are there any big developments that he DIDN'T object too? If the argument that if people did their planning right and there would be no problem is true then surely at some points plans went up that he was even happy with? (Not in WIT for obvious reasons)

He wants playgrounds, community facilities etc. This is interesting:

PLANNING
Planning in Waterford is lopsided. Roads, apartments, housing estates and commercial developments have priority over community facilities. The playgrounds at the People's Park and the Ring Road are not enough for a major city. There is only one public swimming pool in Waterford. Residents' associations and community groups want sportsfields, community facilities and safe open spaces, but they are not being listened to.
We need a clear vision of where we want to be in twenty years' time. Facilities should be provided as housing estates are built. Trees, hedgerows and old structures should be incorporated into new developments, not bulldozed away. The growth in the number of city-centre apartments needs to be matched by public parks and community buildings. The built and archaeological heritage of Waterford needs protection from greedy apartment and commercial developments of inferior design. St. John's River and the Suir have the potential for riverside walks and cycleways with access to wildlife and wetlands. We should develop that potential, not destroy it.
Playgrounds, community halls, sports fields and our natural heritage are not luxuries. They are essential to the well-being of us all.

It was taken from here

He didn't object to the Waterford Health Park (Presentation Convent).
http://www.waterford-news.ie/news/cwgbmhgbey/

Yes Boss

Let's put the success rate to bed. Of the last 34 appeals by Mr. McCann:

• 3 appeals were withdrawn
• 7 were refused ( 4 of which was granted following a second application)
• 24 were granted

Not a very good success rate for all that trouble

dayshah

Yes Boss wrote: »

Let's put the success rate to bed. Of the last 34 appeals by Mr. McCann:

• 3 appeals were withdrawn
• 7 were refused ( 4 of which was granted following a second application)
• 24 were granted

Not a very good success rate for all that trouble

Fairly useless statistics. He rarely objects to entire developments, just to some aspects of them.

For example, with the objection in the OP he is not objecting to the development itself. He is objecting to the lack of an archaeological investigation.

Can you give a link for those numbers?

Yes Boss

dayshah wrote: »

Fairly useless statistics. He rarely objects to entire developments, just to some aspects of them.

For example, with the objection in the OP he is not objecting to the development itself. He is objecting to the lack of an archaeological investigation.

Can you give a link for those numbers?

You will find all you need under www.pleanala.ie.

Bards

ziedth wrote: »

Ok I have a question, are there any big developments that he DIDN'T object too? If the argument that if people did their planning right and there would be no problem is true then surely at some points plans went up that he was even happy with? (Not in WIT for obvious reasons)

Not within the City Boundary, but he did not object to things that would destroy Waterford City , but built by neighbouring authorities.
E.G Ferrybank, Butlerstown Retail Park etc.

ziedth

dayshah wrote: »

Fairly useless statistics. He rarely objects to entire developments, just to some aspects of them.

For example, with the objection in the OP he is not objecting to the development itself. He is objecting to the lack of an archaeological investigation.

Can you give a link for those numbers?

do you not think though that somebody who objects 34 times mentioned is doing so for their own reasons and not for the good of the city?

I'm currently trying to sell a bit of lad that is subject to planning being granted for a bungalow and you wouldn't belive the amount of people objected to it. People not even from the area like.

I think the system is flawed myself.

Yes Boss

ziedth wrote: »

do you not think though that somebody who objects 34 times mentioned is doing so for their own reasons and not for the good of the city?

I'm currently trying to sell a bit of lad that is subject to planning being granted for a bungalow and you wouldn't belive the amount of people objected to it. People not even from the area like.

I think the system is flawed myself.[/QUOTE]

That is fact...The Planning System/Law in Ireland is flawed. There are many academic articles out there confirming this together with articles on NIMBY's, etc.

dayshah

ziedth wrote: »

do you not think though that somebody who objects 34 times mentioned is doing so for their own reasons and not for the good of the city?

I can't see what he would gain. Its not like he is a rival landowner, or owns a shop and doesn't want competition.

I can't see how he gains anything, other than hassle from posters on boards.ie

ziedth

dayshah wrote: »

I can't see what he would gain. Its not like he is a rival landowner, or owns a shop and doesn't want competition.

I can't see how he gains anything, other than hassle from posters on boards.ie

I'm not saying he actually gains anything but I refuse to believe that somebody would object so much without having another reason ya know?

dayshah

ziedth wrote: »

I'm not saying he actually gains anything but I refuse to believe that somebody would object so much without having another reason ya know?

He's an environmentalist. He thinks that Waterford needs a proper development plan, rather than this ad hoc planning process we have.

Yes Boss

dayshah wrote: »

He's an environmentalist. He thinks that Waterford needs a proper development plan, rather than this ad hoc planning process we have.

Therefore, he should stand for election and get involved in the preparation of the City Development Plan instead of penalizing applicants that have to work to that Plan. And it is important to note that not all of the people he objects against are wealthy property developers.

dayshah

Yes Boss wrote: »

Therefore, he should stand for election and get involved in the preparation of the City Development Plan instead of penalizing applicants that have to work to that Plan. And it is important to note that not all of the people he objects against are wealthy property developers.

I know planning laws have changed in the past two years, and I don't know the current situation.

However, until recently at least, the plan wasn't worth the paper it was written on. It was ignored.