Future of Tramore’s Metalman and pillars safe

Sully

tbayers wrote: »

When will the Tramore Council take positive decisions that the Tramore public are behind? Sick to death of all the politics that goes on in the town. Hopefully all is not lost!

The people of Tramore were not fully behind this. They were divided at best, but no side had a clear winner in this debate.

tbayers

Pity all the same, the idea is perfect, would be a great walk full of interesting locations, audio points etc. Just need a solution that works for everyone i suppose. Cant imagine many people being against the idea??

Psychedelic

Sully wrote: »

The people of Tramore were not fully behind this. They were divided at best, but no side had a clear winner in this debate.

The only people I heard of who were against it were Maxine Keoghan and Anne Marie Power, plus the school kid they used on that Facebook page (now removed). They did not get any support from the public, none that I saw or heard of anyway. Sure, some people may have had reservations, but only because of the misinformation being spread by the aforementioned councillors.

However, we do know for a fact that many people, including the majority of town councillors, support Tramore Tourism's proposal.

On that basis I don't think it is fair of you to say the people of Tramore were not behind this, and that there was no clear winner. Surely you would you agree that most, if not everyone in the town would like to see access to the Metalman. But now that opportunity has been lost thanks to two councillors with their own hidden agenda.

DeiseforLiam

What I don't understand is if access to the pillars was the problem, then how would a company or trust be better placed than the local authority in securing this access? As I see it, if the LA (i.e. Dungarvan) had any interest (and a willingness to fund the compensation), they could have secured the access through CPO. They also probably don't want the public liability issue.

Psychedelic

There's a few reasons why the Co. Council couldn't do this, mainly though because they are so bloody useless that the landowners did not want to engage with them any more.

Get the full story and background here: https://www.facebook.com/notes/friends-of-the-metalman/voluntary-dissolution-of-tramore-heritage-ltd/360722990716550

Sully

Psychedelic wrote: »

The only people I heard of who were against it were Maxine Keoghan and Anne Marie Power, plus the school kid they used on that Facebook page (now removed). They did not get any support from the public, none that I saw or heard of anyway. Sure, some people may have had reservations, but only because of the misinformation being spread by the aforementioned councillors.

However, we do know for a fact that many people, including the majority of town councillors, support Tramore Tourism's proposal.

On that basis I don't think it is fair of you to say the people of Tramore were not behind this, and that there was no clear winner. Surely you would you agree that most, if not everyone in the town would like to see access to the Metalman. But now that opportunity has been lost thanks to two councillors with their own hidden agenda.

It was reported in local media (radio & print) that there was concern locally, people sending in letters, texts to radio etc. Some of the local Cllrs who originally voted in favour also expressed concern and said that people spoke of concerns to them. There were a number of individuals in particular that attended the Town Council meeting that were against it.

There is widespread support for opening up the Metal Man, but there was concern with how this was being done. There was so much misinformation out there from both sides, it was a fiasco. Legimate questions and concern were shot down, and you were hassled if you didn't support either side of the debate.

It could have been handled much better. Two Cllrs were fully against it and spoke out against it. Other Cllrs did express concern, and did remind us that they voted against the proposal before, but they voted in favour anyway. Now this seems to be withdrawn again. But there wasn't widespread clear support with the council.

We can't say for certain if there was widespread support for either side of the debate, but no side had a clear winner.

MetalMan9 wrote: »

What I don't understand is if access to the pillars was the problem, then how would a company or trust be better placed than the local authority in securing this access? As I see it, if the LA (i.e. Dungarvan) had any interest (and a willingness to fund the compensation), they could have secured the access through CPO. They also probably don't want the public liability issue.

This was a question asked but no answer was given apart from saying WCC had absolutely no interest and the landowners had no desire to deal with WCC either. Some were suggesting a CPO could easily be done with little money, but I have absolutely no idea if that's true.

I fail to see why the group couldn't address the concerns and issues people had, go back to the council and acknowledge these issues have now been addressed and move forward with the plan to dry get the land and access to it. They originally had a vote whereby they won by a majority to proceed with the plan, and only two cllrs were unhappy. I was told a few weeks ago this is what was happening - mistakes had been made and they were being addressed but now it appears the council have again decided to vote against.

Either way, its in the hands of the new council body and lets hope past mistakes can be forgiven and a new slate can be used in negotiations. It would be lovely to have the Metal Man opened and access given for the people of Tramore and for tourists, and it would be something else we can use when marketing Tramore. I commend the efforts in theory to getting the Metal Man re-opened, and it is disappointing both parties in this debate couldn't see eye to eye and reach a conclusion that served Tramore in an open, honest, transparent and safe way.

DeiseforLiam

Get the full story and background here: https://www.facebook.com/notes/frien...60722990716550

I read that earlier but there's no statutory obligation for the landowners to engage with the company (and all it takes is one to stall the whole thing). That's why a CPO seems the obvious solution.

I don't understand why the company and the LA couldn't have worked in partnership; with the LA taking ownership of the pillars and CPOing the land necessary for access, while the company could have campaigned to secure funding to compensate the landowners, make the access suitable (if the council wouldn't fund it) and pay for any necessary insurances.

The company motives were altruistic after all.

Psychedelic

The Co. Council has no money to do a CPO, they are millions in debt, you only have to look around the town to see where they are not even spending money on basics like rubbish bins, keeping toilets open etc.

It will be interesting to see this plays out now, if the other private company (which is actually private, not non-profit like Tramore Heritage Ltd) set up by one of the objecting councillors will try to take over.

DeiseforLiam

You could have read to the end of my post. It's the compensation that costs the money.

As regards bins, the prom is FULL of bins. I have witnessed people dumping household rubbish so it is not surprising if the council can't keep up (I think they are emptied every 2 days). Also, people can be absolute slobs and don't bother walking to a bin but instead leave it after them on the beach.

Sully

Psychedelic wrote: »

The Co. Council has no money to do a CPO, they are millions in debt, you only have to look around the town to see where they are not even spending money on basics like rubbish bins, keeping toilets open etc.

They never did, even when they had the money. That's not really an issue with money, it was more that Tramore never got a great slice of the big apple. Who knows what the future holds but Maxine said on WLR today that it will remain a Public Private Partnership and she felt the decision by the company was rushed. I would tend to agree. A lot of questions need to be answered, but its like they weren't being answered and these councilors refused to support it until they were.

I assume the debt issue will be dealt with somehow when city finances come into play.

It will be interesting to see this plays out now, if the other private company (which is actually private, not non-profit like Tramore Heritage Ltd) set up by one of the objecting councillors will try to take over.

This is what I hate about the debate. Maxine said very clearly from the start that company will have nothing to do with it and it never will. She stated it was never the intention to set it up and outlined why on the page now deleted.

Anybody who didn't support it was lambasted. Maxine & Co. raise very good valid points in their arguments - such as Non Profit status can't be given when a director lives outside the country, a bridge can't be built because its in breach of EU Laws on protected structures and also the county development plan, the structure of the company allows for assets to be sold on, company structure allowed for directors to make a profit, a public media campaign only done once the Cllr raised these points, and so on.

I have no idea if that's true or not, but I don't recall these issues being actually addressed. I said from day one that I supported the idea in principal, even on WLR I said this and to some of the directors and those involved, but I wanted it more in public ownership or at the very least a group with a very clear, open, secure, transparent mandate that everybody in Tramore can get involved in and not just a select few. However, because I didn't come out in full support I was personally lambasted.

The way forward is what was asked at the council meeting back in February - a Public Private approach. This is what the new council body will be asked to do - work with one such organisation and not allowed a solo run by any one organisation. Tramore Heritage has given up on the idea, for now anyway. Please god and say prayers that this will actually happen.

wellboytoo

The two Councillors mentioned did a hatchet job on the only viable workable proposal to come out in years, there is no gainsaying that, for whatever reasons they have good or ill, unfortunately they had no positive proposal to put forward in its place other than to let it go back into the failed local authority mess that is called local government.
We will not hear of this again for years it was a bad days work by these two ladies and Tramore yet again says NO.

DeiseforLiam

Psychedelic wrote: »

The Co. Council has no money to do a CPO, they are millions in debt

This is a bit naiive when you consider that the Council secured €7M for Dungarvan under the Smarter Travel scheme (to be spent over the next 5 years). They even bought iPads for first years to encourage them to cycle to school (no heavy bags to carry).

I agree that the Councillors don't appear to have done much to progress matters but equally, how was the company any closer to acquiring the land for access? The County Manager and planners needed to be on board for this to ever come to fruition.

If the pillars were in Clonea, I think it would be a very different story.

Max Powers

to me it looks like councillors for whatever silly reasons or probable incompetence made a mess of this. That group that set up a specific purpose non profit company clearly looked like the best bet for getting the obvious tourist attraction open. The councillors are so incompetent that i cant see anything happening again for a long time.

On a different note, how pathetic is Tramore town council and W.CoCo as this tourist attraction has not yet being opened up to tourism. The incompetence of this I find staggering. Im from Waterford, like the odd walk, like to see Waterford tourist attractions and i havent seen the Metal man up close. How could anyone take Tramore serious as a tourist destination when it is such a 2-bit bunch running it that they couldnt get what is effectively the symbol of Tramore and County Waterford tourism up and running. This should have been done back with the foundation of the state nearly 100 years ago, truly pathetic. Shame on Tramore council, just as well they are getting rid of it, pathetic.

Sully

Cllrs should not be lambasted for making very valid points and for seeking legal advise. There seems to be an attitude by some in this debate that it should be pushed through 'No Questions Asked' - which happened during planning in boom time, hence why some councils are under public investigation and why we have unfinished estates, derelict shopping centers and so on.

They raised valid questionable points which even directors of THL agreed were issues. It would be inappropriate and a disgrace if they chose to do otherwise, and leave the issues aside and potential open up risks in the future. Remember also, a majority of councilors are needed to support a motion and a majority did support requesting the new council, via a Public Private Partnership, proceed with this.

tbayers

Few votes have been lost for them thats for sure!

Max Powers

Sully wrote: »

Cllrs should not be lambasted for making very valid points and for seeking legal advise. There seems to be an attitude by some in this debate that it should be pushed through 'No Questions Asked' - which happened during planning in boom time, hence why some councils are under public investigation and why we have unfinished estates, derelict shopping centers and so on.

They raised valid questionable points which even directors of THL agreed were issues. It would be inappropriate and a disgrace if they chose to do otherwise, and leave the issues aside and potential open up risks in the future. Remember also, a majority of councilors are needed to support a motion and a majority did support requesting the new council, via a Public Private Partnership, proceed with this.

They should have worked with that group rather than put roadblocks in its way. Fact remains, they never have done anything on it, they are gonna be shamed into doing something about it now, will still probably take years for it to happen if it does. Some of the councillors comments sounded like they had a gripe against some of the people 'no detail in the plan' then they were quoting supposed detail from a fictional plan to harm the groups case, shameful behaviour. I think Tramore town council has behaved pathetically on this and as i said it will be a good day when they scrap all those town councils.

invalid

As of June next year Tramore Town Council will be part of Tramores history, a very minor part. But do not think that the City is a white knight, coming in to save the town. It is still very hard to see what will change.

As for this sad chapter, I personally feel that the 2 councillors have let the Town down badly. It is one thing to be against something, but the way they went about there business was very shabby. The sooner they are no longer councillors the better. You should never be against something without having a realistic alternative.