McDonalds; another planning application

Blandpebbles

Yet another win for people abdicating from their responsibilities.

I it take these same parents will stop their kids eating in any fast food place anywhere ever.... Or do they just get obese if eating within a few feet of a school?

Fiveplusone

I would have to say I was ok either way about this. Just because its there doesnt mean I would go in, maybe an odd time. Hell life has much more important things going on. Worse things are happening.

Teenagers will do the junk food no matter where they get it. I challenge anyone to visit the Blacklion centre any day after school and see what the kids are eating and guess what - a big mac would nearly be a healthy option. Teenagers have not changed. I think parents have though.

Langerland

Have to say, I was bemused at the level of action on this considering other issues in our community, county, country & world.....

However, that being said, it just doesn't look good to have a fast food joint (of any type or brand) in what is effectively the same development as a number of schools. So I'm happy that they will have to move this to another more appropriate location in Greystones.

There was a rumour that Burger King were looking at the old cinema as a location. Was that just nonsense?

DubOnHoliday

Langerland wrote: »

Have to say, I was bemused at the level of action on this considering other issues in our community, county, country & world.....

Keyboards all over Greystones have taken a pounding over the past weeks thats for sure

2011

Blandpebbles wrote: »

Yet another win for people abdicating from their responsibilities.

I it take these same parents will stop their kids eating in any fast food place anywhere ever.... Or do they just get obese if eating within a few feet of a school?

If you are going to follow what you are inferring to its natural conclusion then you may as well have a McDonnalds in the school along with cigarette and alcohol vending machines. Sure the kids can get drink and fags nearby anyway, can't they???

clocha_liatha

Blandpebbles wrote: »

Yet another win for people abdicating from their responsibilities.

I it take these same parents will stop their kids eating in any fast food place anywhere ever.... Or do they just get obese if eating within a few feet of a school?

i don't think its that simple but you do have a point. My own major objection was as i outlined earlier on a previous post was due to increased traffic levels.
Re the planning permission in the first place it is obvious and probably not disputable that the application was heavily linked to the fact that there were 3 schools on its potential doorstep.
Subliminal advertising is a real factor here, having Mcd's so close to schools would have just that effect. You pass it every day ,you see it out your window in the play yard etc.
i was listening to a good programme on radio one evening where wine of licences carried out an experiment where they played French Spanish and Italian music on different night in the background of their premises to see if it influenced sales.In some case studies French wine sales went up by over 30% on the night in question followed by similar rises in our nights.
Having a Mcd's beside schools would similarly have an advertising effect in a subconcious way.
I agree its parents responsibility to provide proper food etc for kids, some say don't give them the money then they cant buy the fast food, its not that simple.

stanley1980

I know what would happen in the secondary school where I teach if a McDonald's opened up stone's throw from the school: the kids would be absolutely over the moon! Kids who ordinarily bring a packed lunch would be tossing it in the bin as they sauntered over to McDonald's at lunchtime/after school to hang out with friends. Quick access to junk food, WIFI with ample seating- they'd be in heaven!

There's is a chipper 10 minutes from the school and yes some kids go there for lunch which I think is dreadful. However when it's raining (as is often the case!) they simply don't bother. Yes, it's parents who give children money but rightly or wrongly, children have far greater disposable incomes these days (from a variety of sources) than when I was young. Put temptation, delicious junk food, €1 burgers (immaculately advertised/presented temptation at that) literally in the faces of children multiple times a day over 5/6 years and you can be sure they will succumb. Lazy/bad parents will quickly cave in or willingly hand over the cash; good parents will be driven mad with requests for money.

The Bishop Basher

This couldn't have been about junk food for sale near schools.

If it was, we would be going after ALL junk food outlets near schools. And yes, that includes Lidl who sell a far greater variety of junk food at even lower prices.

We've had Pizza shops in exactly the same location for years now, regularly advertising school meal deals and putting people outside in costumes designed to target kids, yet not a word from this vocal minority.

The ultimate farce was the fact these same campaigners actually considered a boycott on Lidl, to try and force them into rejecting the McDonald's application, while not once questioning the fact that Lidl themselves continue to sell cheap junk food to school children on a daily basis.

This level of hypocrisy would be utterly indefensible so there has to be another agenda.

Personally I think it's an element of snobbery and an anti McDonald's tirade or an anti big business tirade but the reality is anyone's guess. .

While there's no question that obesity is a serious problem and needs to be addressed, it's a little disingenuous for the no side to claim any victory.

If the enemy, as they claim, really is in fact obesity, then we are long long way from any victory. On the contrary. As long as we continue to shun personal responsibility and point the finger at companies like McDonald's, while allowing our kids continue to eat junk food purchased every where else, they are going to continue to get bigger, fatter and sicker.

So while Nero is busy fiddling and blaming everyone but himself, Rome is busy burning and our kids will be the only losers...

Blandpebbles

2011 wrote: »

If you are going to follow what you are inferring to its natural conclusion then you may as well have a McDonnalds in the school along with cigarette and alcohol vending machines. Sure the kids can get drink and fags nearby anyway, can't they???

Ok what is the proposed distance from a school junk food, fags and booze have to be before parents except responsibility for their kids actions and funding? Is it their front doors?

How soon before people are being sued for giving kids sweets on Halloween?

At the end of the day the win is really for Lidl, Jokers, Joe's and the other chippies because now they still have a captive school audience for chips and no competition from McDs apart from when their parents bring them there on weekends.

jobless

Swanner wrote: »

This couldn't have been about junk food for sale near schools.

If it was, we would be going after ALL junk food outlets near schools. And yes, that includes Lidl who sell a far greater variety of junk food at even lower prices.

We've had Pizza shops in exactly the same location for years now, regularly advertising school meal deals and putting people outside in costumes designed to target kids, yet not a word from this vocal minority.

The ultimate farce was the fact these same campaigners actually considered a boycott on Lidl, to try and force them into rejecting the McDonald's application, while not once questioning the fact that Lidl themselves continue to sell cheap junk food to school children on a daily basis.

This level of hypocrisy would be utterly indefensible so there has to be another agenda.

Personally I think it's an element of snobbery and an anti McDonald's tirade or an anti big business tirade but the reality is anyone's guess. .

While there's no question that obesity is a serious problem and needs to be addressed, it's a little disingenuous for the no side to claim any victory.

If the enemy, as they claim, really is in fact obesity, then we are long long way from any victory. On the contrary. As long as we continue to shun personal responsibility and point the finger at companies like McDonald's, while allowing our kids continue to eat junk food purchased every where else, they are going to continue to get bigger, fatter and sicker.

So while Nero is busy fiddling and blaming everyone but himself, Rome is busy burning and our kids will be the only losers...

The pizza places that were there had long closed before the schools opened, and while the argument about lidl and the other shops nearby are valid i dont think they are on the same level as having a drive through immediately overlooking the school yard.

My concerns were more about the increase in the traffic in the area... but i think its a good thing these fast food outlets cant open directly opposite schools

2011

Blandpebbles wrote: »

Ok what is the proposed distance from a school junk food, fags and booze have to be before parents except responsibility for their kids actions and funding? Is it their front doors?

How soon before people are being sued for giving kids sweets on Halloween?

At the end of the day the win is really for Lidl, Jokers, Joe's and the other chippies because now they still have a captive school audience for chips and no competition from McDs apart from when their parents bring them there on weekends.

A line has to be drawn somewhere.
Ask 100 people where the line should be drawn and you will get 100 different answers.
In my opinion the proposal to build McDonald's in that location crossed the line. Whereas others would have no issue with a McDonnalds in every school, would you agree with them? If not why not?

Have read of Stanley180's last post, his convincing post explains my reasoning.

The Bishop Basher

jobless wrote: »

The pizza places that were there had long closed before the schools opened,

That's not actually correct. There have been pizza shops open and actively targeting kids in that location since those schools opened.

jobless wrote: »

and while the argument about lidl and the other shops nearby are valid i dont think they are on the same level as having a drive through immediately overlooking the school yard.

Why not though ? That's where the kids are buying their junk right now ? Right now, the stuff they're buying in Lidl is making them fat. Why is that ok ? Why does the anti McDonalds campaign blatantly ignore this fact ? We know they're getting fatter right now so why is it ok for them to get fat on Lidl junk but not McDonalds junk ?

The hypocrisy is astounding.

Personally I don't have an issue with Lidl in that location selling what they sell to school kids because it's not Lidl's problem. It's our problem.

Do you want to fight McDonalds or do you want to fight obesity ?

You can try and ban all the bad choices you want but they'll always be there. Education Is the only weapon we have in the fight against obesity. If we don't give them the knowledge and tools to make good choices, they'll make bad ones. So let's take responsibility for that and put our time and energy into something that works instead of chasing imaginary bogey men away who aren't in any way responsible for our children.

jobless wrote: »

My concerns were more about the increase in the traffic in the area... but i think its a good thing these fast food outlets cant open directly opposite schools

I agree with you on the traffic. I live close by and it's a disaster every morning. But that's down to poor planning. 3 rows of lights in quick succession with piss poor intervals and 3 schools planted at the last set of lights on the main route out of the town was never going to work. The real problems are peak times when everyone goes to work and schools open and shut. A slow and steady trickle of traffic through McDonalds would have had a very negligible effect.

Zoo4m8

McD's would have a little or no effect on traffic.. Wait till Templecarrig reaches capacity, wait till Seagreen is finished and occupied, wait till the proposed development beside Seagreen is finished and occupied...now that's traffic! :mad:

stanley1980

I think I’m right in saying the pizza place was there before the schools were built. My issue is that something like a McDonald’s could open up right beside just after these schools have been built i.e. there’s not much we can do now about schools with long-established businesses in their vicinity.

Yes Lidl sells junk food like crisps etc but sales of such products are not what that company and its competitors is based on…..unlike McDonald’s- so it’s hardly comparing like with like. Lidl and other supermarkets have plenty of healthy food there too- can you honestly say the same about McDonald’s et al. Oh sorry, I can just see the kids clambering for a McSalad! Most importantly, Lidl etc just don’t entice, allure and tantalise children/teenagers/adults in the same way as McDonald’s! That's just a fact.

My main concern is that McDonald’s would give these children the perfect spot to hang out at lunchtime/after school….inevitably eating McDonald’s while they do it- normalising such behaviour and forming life-long habits. Yes, education is important but you’re kidding yourself if you think a child/teenager won’t follow their friends over to McDonald’s at lunchtime to socialise. Who could blame them?! Hanging around outside Lidl in the rain doesn’t have quite the same appeal I’d suggest.

I don’t think anyone is claiming this will prevent obesity (I’m certainly not) but rather it’s one step in a wider process of limiting it. I respect the arguments of the people who disagree here and I would guess that their kids are being raised in such a way that they’re probably not going to be overly affected by this either way- not all children are so lucky.

The Bishop Basher

stanley1980 wrote: »

I respect the arguments of the people who disagree here and I would guess that their kids are being raised in such a way that they’re probably not going to be overly affected by this either way- not all children are so lucky.

And should choices be removed for the rest of society on the basis that some are poorly educated ?

The ones that eat rubbish are eating it anyway. We don't have a McDonalds and they're eating rubbish. That's all i'm saying. McDonalds isn't the issue. Poor choices are. You can't ban all the choices and the more time and resources put into fighting McDonalds, the less time and resources are spent tackling the actual problem.

Treat the illness, not the symptom.

stanley1980

Swanner wrote: »

And should choices be removed for the rest of society on the basis that some are poorly educated ?

The ones that eat rubbish are eating it anyway. We don't have a McDonalds and they're eating rubbish. That's all i'm saying. McDonalds isn't the issue. Poor choices are. You can't ban all the choices and the more time and resources put into fighting McDonalds, the less time and resources are spent tackling the actual problem.

Treat the illness, not the symptom.

Please stop putting words in my mouth. When did I say I wanted to 'ban all choices'? Please refer to my previous posts- my main concern here was the location so close to schools. I've already outlined twice why I believe a McDonald's in that particular location would be so potentially harmful to children particularly teenagers.
It's interesting. I seem to remember opponents of the smoking ban making similar comments to you. The reality is yes we do remove ‘choices’ in our society in every avenue of life especially where children are involved. It's called being responsible.

The Bishop Basher

I'm not saying that you personally want to ban all choices but the anti McDonalds campaign would like to remove lots more choices in fact as I understand it they're going national.

The smoking ban is not comparable in any way. It was introduced to protect workers in enclosed spaces who had no choice but to breath second hand smoke.

That's the difference. Choice.

Look we both agree that obesity is a problem. We
Disagree on the manner in which we think it should be tackled. That's fine. Life would be boring if we all thought the same.

All I know is that McDonalds isn't going to locate in Greystones yet our kids will continue to get fatter. Take from that what you wish. To me it indicates that we're not actually addressing the root cause of the problem.

Macy0161

I still don't get the venom of the objections on health grounds. McDonalds wasn't in isolation, with other choices in the area. A lidl chocolate croissant is cheaper and less healthy than the €1 burger, and still available right beside the schools. Plenty of worse options in terms of wrap and roll fillings at any deli counter too. It basically comes down to parents feeling they're unable to say no to children and/or teach them about healthy choices and balanced diets (nothing necessarily wrong with an occasional pastry, burger or wrap).

jobless

Macy0161 wrote: »

I still don't get the venom of the objections on health grounds. McDonalds wasn't in isolation, with other choices in the area. A lidl chocolate croissant is cheaper and less healthy than the €1 burger, and still available right beside the schools. Plenty of worse options in terms of wrap and roll fillings at any deli counter too. It basically comes down to parents feeling they're unable to say no to children and/or teach them about healthy choices and balanced diets (nothing necessarily wrong with an occasional pastry, burger or wrap).

As other posters said above, lidls wasnt designed to entice kids in like mcdonalds does.... lidl doesnt have a big clown as its mascot and offer kiddie toys with it meals...
being directly opposite a primary school you'll have it directly in kids faces when they are at school..... I disagree with the comparison with Lidls..

loyatemu

there are probably better places to discuss healthy eating and obesity. McD's aren't opening in Blacklion - stick a fork in this thread, it's done!

The Bishop Basher

Macy0161 wrote: »

I still don't get the venom of the objections on health grounds. McDonalds wasn't in isolation, with other choices in the area. A lidl chocolate croissant is cheaper and less healthy than the €1 burger, and still available right beside the schools. Plenty of worse options in terms of wrap and roll fillings at any deli counter too. It basically comes down to parents feeling they're unable to say no to children and/or teach them about healthy choices and balanced diets (nothing necessarily wrong with an occasional pastry, burger or wrap).

Macy0161 - You should be aware by now that kids only get fat on junk food that's targetted at them so Lidl junk food is ok because Lidl don't target kids. They can eat Pain au Chocalat's all day and it's fine, they won't get fat on them. One sniff of that burger though and they're off to fat camp

The more I hear from these no campaigners the more obvious it becomes that this really was all just an anti McDonald's tirade.

That's great an all if that's how you get your kicks but please don't fool yourselves into thinking your fixing obesity. You're not. By focusing on the wrong solution, you're actually contributing to the problem.

"The victim mindset dilutes the human potential. By not accepting personal responsibility for our circumstances, we greatly reduce our power to change them." - Dr Steve Maraboli.

I agree that this has been done to death and i'm out :-)

LEIN

loyatemu wrote: »

there are probably better places to discuss healthy eating and obesity. McD's aren't opening in Blacklion - stick a fork in this thread, it's done!

There's no cutlery in McDonald's

greig

Agreed Lidl has some unhealthy choices. Agreed mcdonalds does target children, Ronald and his happy meals.

Unfortunately lidl was there first, no schools built. We can only look at future developments and cannot ask lidl to be knocked down!

Surely enough is enough. people will argue on about this for years bit a decision has been made.

Annasopra

loyatemu wrote: »

there are probably better places to discuss healthy eating and obesity. McD's aren't opening in Blacklion - stick a fork in this thread, it's done!

Leave the modding to the moderators.

recedite

I see the draft development plan has recently been released to the public.
In Chapter 6, page 15 we have....

RT17
Conscious of the fact that planning has an important role to play in promoting and facilitating active and healthy living patterns for local communities, the following criteria will be taken into account in the assessment of development proposals for fast food/takeaway outlets, including those with a drive through facility:
•Exclude any new fast-food outlets which offer foods that are high in fat, salt or sugar from being built or from operating within 400m of the
gates or site boundary of schools, parks or playgrounds, excluding premises zoned town centre;
• Fast food outlets/takeaways with proposed drive through facilities will generally only be acceptable within Major Town Centres or District Centres and will be as sessed on a case-by-case basis;
•Location of vents and other external services and their impact on adjoining amenities in terms of noise/smell/visual impact.

"Town Centre" zoning at the south end of the town extends to that scruffy wasteland area just south of The Script building, but does not include the "IDA site", which I think is the nicer field growing winter wheat or some such crop, at the corner of the Charlesland roundabout.

loyatemu

recedite wrote: »

"IDA site", which I think is the nicer field growing winter wheat or some such crop, at the corner of the Charlesland roundabout.

That is the IDA site (opposite Shoreline) - ironically that was proposed as a site for what eventually became Temple Carrig School; would have been a much better location too, close to all the sport facilities etc.

recedite

Although they have their own sports facilities in TC (including a nice astroturf type pitch) And it is a good site for secondary school being beside two primary schools.
What they should to do is move St Davids down into that IDA field, and give it some extra space and facilities. Then turn the old St Davids into a bar/restaurant/hotel with a magnificent sea view.
Can't happen though because of the situation we have in this country with church owned schools and publicly owned schools; and the one being run by the other and vice versa. Too many cooks spoil the soup.