McDonald's Planning Permission Approved

Blandpebbles

Good to see common sense triumphing over rampant snowflakes and abdication of parental responsibility.
http://www.thejournal.ie/mcdonalds-greystones-court-case-3491212-Jul2017/

Charlie-Bravo

Blandpebbles wrote: »

Good to see common sense triumphing over rampant snowflakes and abdication of parental responsibility.
http://www.thejournal.ie/mcdonalds-greystones-court-case-3491212-Jul2017/

It's not common sense if it is more common that popular opinion was against it.

zoobizoo

Snowflakes?

Do people use that term in Ireland now?

heroics

Blandpebbles wrote: »

Good to see common sense triumphing over rampant snowflakes and abdication of parental responsibility.
http://www.thejournal.ie/mcdonalds-greystones-court-case-3491212-Jul2017/

Great news. No more driving to carrickmines.

neckedit

astrofluff wrote: »

It's not common sense if it is more common that popular opinion was against it.

More people are obviously not against it.
I really can't fathom the reason for blocking McDonald's.

Mitch Connor

heroics wrote: »

Great news. No more driving to carrickmines.

They are still not building there - they have simply won a case against the 'no fry zone' thing people were trying to implement, I think.

As far as I know this case is a matter of principle, rather than McDonalds going to actually build there as a result.

heroics

Mitch Connor wrote: »

They are still not building there - they have simply won a case against the 'no fry zone' thing people were trying to implement, I think.

As far as I know this case is a matter of principle, rather than McDonalds going to actually build there as a result.

WHHYYYYYY build up my hopes and then crush them

neckedit

Mitch Connor wrote: »

They are still not building there - they have simply won a case against the 'no fry zone' thing people were trying to implement, I think.

As far as I know this case is a matter of principle, rather than McDonalds going to actually build there as a result.

What Principle?
I'm not trying start... just really curious why this has caused hassle

REFLINE1

Mitch Connor wrote: »

heroics wrote: »

Great news. No more driving to carrickmines.

They are still not building there - they have simply won a case against the 'no fry zone' thing people were trying to implement, I think.

As far as I know this case is a matter of principle, rather than McDonalds going to actually build there as a result.

.

eigrod

neckedit wrote: »

What Principle?
I'm not trying start... just really curious why this has caused hassle

Because some parents might now have to instil some discipline into their kids not to go to McDonalds, or not to give them money to go to McDonalds, rather than the easier option of having no McDonalds to go to.

Annasopra

Mitch Connor wrote: »

They are still not building there - they have simply won a case against the 'no fry zone' thing people were trying to implement, I think.

As far as I know this case is a matter of principle, rather than McDonalds going to actually build there as a result.

No

The no fry zone is now in the county development plan

This was to do with McDs being granted planning permission.

Annasopra

neckedit wrote: »

What Principle?
I'm not trying start... just really curious why this has caused hassle

The principle of fast food outlets directly targeting children outside their school gates.

Blandpebbles

Planning permission approved means just that... allowed to build.

Que the next snowflake jihad.... or back to complaining about harbour

Annasopra

Blandpebbles wrote: »

Planning permission approved means just that... allowed to build.

Que the next snowflake jihad.... or back to complaining about harbour

Yawn

Your trolling is piss poor at this stage

I don't even have kids, and no intention of having kids, and I don't think the site is right for a McDs. No problem with them opening one in Greystones, and within 1km of any school, but this is practically in their lunch hall.

hank scorpio89

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No

The no fry zone is now in the county development plan

This was to do with McDs being granted planning permission.

No fry zone hahaha priceless.

Annasopra

hank scorpio89 wrote: »

No fry zone hahaha priceless.

Laugh all you want - the campaigners won and its now in the county development plan i.e. planning law

http://www.thejournal.ie/no-fry-zones-wicklow-3068787-Nov2016/

Blandpebbles

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Laugh all you want - the campaigners won and its now in the county development plan i.e. planning law

http://www.thejournal.ie/no-fry-zones-wicklow-3068787-Nov2016/

And yet it is completely ignored in this instance

JupiterKid

Why do I get the distinct impression that the anti-McDonalds sentiment in Greystones is simply classist food snobbery masquerading as concern for children?

I'm sure if it was an overpriced tofu or falafel eatery that was proposed, there would be no objections to it. And whatever happened to parental responsibility?

Annasopra

Blandpebbles wrote: »

And yet it is completely ignored in this instance

You cant retrospectively change the law!

chinacrisis

JupiterKid wrote: »

Why do I get the distinct impression that the anti-McDonalds sentiment in Greystones is simply classist food snobbery masquerading as concern for children?

I'm sure if it was an overpriced tofu or falafel eatery that was proposed, there would be no objections to it. And whatever happened to parental responsibility?

I'm sure there's an element of truth in what you're saying though last time I checked kids don't harrang their parents for tofu and falafel....even in Greystones!

Rocket19

JupiterKid wrote: »

Why do I get the distinct impression that the anti-McDonalds sentiment in Greystones is simply classist food snobbery masquerading as concern for children?

I'm sure if it was an overpriced tofu or falafel eatery that was proposed, there would be no objections to it. And whatever happened to parental responsibility?

I love how this is always rollled out. There is absolutely nothing wrong with food snobbery, as you call it, if it's an attempt to limit people's consumption of cheap, nutritionally void food. If eating healthy makes you a snob these days, then so be it. It is true also that's a drive thru McDonalds is not exactly the most appealing thing to encounter at the very entrance of the town, and I don't see anything wrong with objecting to that.

With regards to your statement about parental responsibility,you are correct, but, in saying that, I believe it is the job of the government/council to make the right thing easier for parents. It is far easier to eat healthy and to model this for your children if those are the options presented to you. Not to mention we all know that McDonald's is highly appealing to kids, and is strongly and effectively marketed as such. You are also neglecting the fact that secondary school kids have their own spending power, and the potential McDonald's would be right outside their gate. There is very little parents can do in that situation.

2011

Lidl won't let McDonalds have the site so planning or no planning it won't be built at the entrance of these three schools. Call me a snob, but I think Lydl should be commended for this.

Like it or not some parents simply do not understand the importance of a healthy diet which is part of the reason that there are so many obese children.

CeilingFly

Interesting that McDonald's closed their town centre branch in Naas because it wasn't doing the figures.

I used to use it as an offsite meeting place as it had decent coffee, comfortable seats and excellent wifi.

Probably was in it twice a week, almost always mid afternoon - similar time to when kids got off school and there's both primary and secondary schools within 50/60 metres (maybe less) of the front door.

I don't remember ever seeing school kids in it. I also checked with a colleague who used it even more and she couldn't remember ever seeing kids in it, even at lunchtime.

Similarly the kids don't go into the pub next to McDonald's either.

They do have a branch about 2km away in monread, but thw town centre branch next to 2 quite large schools did so little business that it was shuttered.

So anyone worried should look at this example and realise that if they do open in greystones, the school kids will not be frequenting it.

2011

Hardly a conclusive study.
Anyway it doesn't matter because they can't open at Templecarrig.

CeilingFly

2011 wrote: »

Hardly a conclusive study.
Anyway it doesn't matter because they can't open at Templecarrig.

Of course not, but a very valid example aa one of the arguments used by those against it was that McDonald's were targeting school kids and the kids would frequent it.

The Naas example with 2 large schools 3 doors away - literally less than 50m, shows that schools do not enhance the business.

Annasopra

CeilingFly wrote: »

Of course not, but a very valid example aa one of the arguments used by those against it was that McDonald's were targeting school kids and the kids would frequent it.

The Naas example with 2 large schools 3 doors away - literally less than 50m, shows that schools do not enhance the business.

I've been in Bray and it does there so your anecdote is only that an anecdote that doesnt necessarily prove your theory

Blandpebbles

2011 wrote: »

Lidl won't let McDonalds have the site so planning or no planning it won't be built at the entrance of these three schools. Call me a snob, but I think Lydl should be commended for this.

Like it or not some parents simply do not understand the importance of a healthy diet which is part of the reason that there are so many obese children.

Food outlet refuses to allow competitor to build next to it... suddenly becomes a commendable action and Lidl becomes a champion of food snobbery...trumpism of the week.

I wonder how many irate parents actually have kids in temple carriag anyway.

No amount of word smithing is going to change the fact that planning is approved and no fry zones ignored.

2011

I think this thread has run its course.