Proposed gambling club to overlook graveyard

foxylad · 12-04-2009 5:22pm #1

http://www.munster-express.ie/local-news/proposed-gambling-club-to-overlook-graveyard/

is this a winde up>???
where is the graveyard??
why cant people park on the street?
whats wrong with a card club at that end of town?

the mind boggles!

Cabaal · 12-04-2009 5:46pm

So basically the council have pulled a fast one with the paid parking and were caught out and now they are trying to allow another fast one and have been caught out...you can't accept a gift with T&C's and then try and throw the T&C's out the window.

Bad form to allow this to go ahead

Sully · 12-04-2009 6:27pm

Can understand the concern from them alright. This was not what the site was given to the council for and would be a breach of trust. Probably should not have any type of commerical use on the site, regardless of the type. Not fair to single out gambling really. Close of the area and make a memorial like it should be.

Sully · 12-04-2009 9:12pm

I assume our new members posting in this have a connection with the club?

Anyway.. it seems a little odd (maybe I am not familiar with the quaker background) that the objection is focused mainly on the Gambling side of things. The council were given land, from what I gather, on conditions which were not met by them. Quakers found out and the council seem to have agreed to address their concerns by removing parking and making the burial site somewhat proper.

Now Blazin Aces are looking to locate there and the Quakers are annoyed that such an activity will be held in front of the burial site and are hoping the council will reject such a development/activity as it is not suitable for such land. As they say, its against the conditions the land was given to them.

I cant see it holding any wait in court or by planning authorities - I would assume there is no legal stipulation which requires the council to block commercial activity or gambling on such site.

I do see the Quakers point but as long as the ground is marked in someway I cant see the problem with what commercial activity is located there. Nothing to do with employment, as I doubt any jobs would be lost or extra created - they already have a premises don't they, and assume they are just re-locating in an area with better foot traffic?

There is no other commercial development on the site so Revolutions/KFC have no weight on this argument.

Cabaal · 12-04-2009 9:37pm

D4DOG wrote: »

. I mean just because it overlooks a so called burial ground ...

So your doubting it is a burial ground?
Care to back up this suggestion with actual fact, unless you can prove otherwise it IS a burial ground there is no "so called" about it.

ziedth · 13-04-2009 1:03pm

IMO its a giant pile of ****e,

TBH i have little or no knowledge of quakers but from reading the article on the munster they seem to have been very good for the city. BUT like sully said if they want their memorial there so be it and no business at all.

How anyone thinks they have the right to say what kind of business can go somewhere is beyond me. Blazing aces have been in the city now for many years and they have as much right as fieldmaster/hewden/widgers to go into that premises.

Thats my opinion anyway.

foxylad · 13-04-2009 2:42pm

from my veow point --- the quakers burial ground was wyse park -
the poker club is going into the retail units under the appartments ---
they are built and vacant
revolution set up business there - so did masons -

should they stop trading too?

Sully · 13-04-2009 2:51pm

foxylad wrote: »

revolution set up business there - so did masons -

should they stop trading too?

You seem to be forgetting that both Masons and Revolution do NOT face the burial ground. This notion that "Well X, Y and Z store are there, why cant we?" does not apply because this will be the FIRST retail unit facing the burial ground. The apartments (which are some state inside, though thats a different topic) and parking seem to be the only activity present. Parking is now being removed leaving just the apartments.

Elle Victorine · 13-04-2009 10:18pm

Wysse park is the cemetary is it?

There's one just up around the corner as well actually. Wasn't aware fo the Quaker one.

And Quakers forbid gambling or any games of chance that involve staking money etc. so that's why they would have an aversion to the whole notion of a gambling facility being put near a burial ground.

ziedth · 14-04-2009 8:15am

Elle Victorine wrote: »

Quakers forbid gambling or any games of chance that involve staking money etc. so that's why they would have an aversion to the whole notion of a gambling facility being put near a burial ground.

And that is there right to believe that even though I don't agree with it. just to repeat my point the Blazing aces regardless of if you agree with what they do or not are a local company who provide a service that is not seedy/morally questionable. I would say ont thing if they wanted to put a lap dancing club there (even though I would still be of the same view that it is there right to go where they like).

If they didn't want anything facing the graveyard so be it, but in the climate we are in ETC does anyone have the right to stop Blazing aces making positive moves for their business provided of course they haven't done anything wrong in their application.

well butty · 14-04-2009 8:24am

A planning appeal on Religious grounds! That one shouldn't stand up. I believe Mr. McCann have objected to on the grounds that it will have a negative impact on society???

merlante · 14-04-2009 9:03am

ziedth wrote: »

IMO its a giant pile of ****e,

TBH i have little or no knowledge of quakers but from reading the article on the munster they seem to have been very good for the city. BUT like sully said if they want their memorial there so be it and no business at all.

Sigh.. hmm.. who were the quakers, lets see:
Penrose/Gatchell - The original Waterford glass. Enough said.
Malcolmson - Built Portlaw as a model factory town. Built the Neptune Shipyard which produced and operated the largest fleet of iron steamers in the world between the mid-1850s and the late-1860s. He employed 1,500. They even issued their own money within a 30 mile radius of Waterford. Built the first Tramore race course.
Jacob - Heard of the cream cracker? He started in Waterford.
Denny - Rashers. Invented in Waterford as a novel way of curing meat.
Cherry - Cherry's brewery on the Quay, now a Guinness brewery.

The quakers were the best thing that ever happened to Waterford. It's a disgrace that people don't know what they did, and it's also a disgrace that we have the disrespect to misuse the land they gave to the city.

well butty · 14-04-2009 9:09am

merlante wrote: »

Sigh.. hmm.. who were the quakers, lets see:
Penrose/Gatchell - The original Waterford glass. Enough said.
Malcolmson - Built Portlaw as a model factory town. Built the Neptune Shipyard which produced and operated the largest fleet of iron steamers in the world between the mid-1850s and the late-1860s. He employed 1,500. They even issued their own money within a 30 mile radius of Waterford. Built the first Tramore race course.
Jacob - Heard of the cream cracker? He started in Waterford.
Denny - Rashers. Invented in Waterford as a novel way of curing meat.
Cherry - Cherry's brewery on the Quay, now a Guinness brewery.

The quakers were the best thing that ever happened to Waterford. It's a disgrace that people don't know what they did, and it's also a disgrace that we have the disrespect to misuse the land they gave to the city.

Was there gambling at Tramore race course????

merlante · 14-04-2009 9:12am

well butty wrote: »

Was there gambling at Tramore race course????

Not sure if he built the racecourse actually. But he did build a bank and reclaim the land:
http://thehavenhotel.com/jcm/about-the-haven/a-short-history-of-the-haven.html?showall=1

"The Malcolmson will also be remembered in Tramore, where in the 1860’s William was involved in construction the Malcolmson bank – a feat of engineering which cut off the waters of the Rhine shark from a portion of the land at the rear of the strand. 263 acres were reclaimed and a fine racecourse was built. With age and neglect of repair, one winter’s storm in 1912 ended a lifetime’s work and flooded the racecourse forever."

Cabaal · 14-04-2009 9:22am

So basically he simply engineered the bank to reclaim land but didn't actually built the racecourse, he/they did a good thing for Tramore and when they went Tramore didn't keep up repair so they lost the land again (muppets)

Anyway bottom line is if they gave the land as a gift under conditions to the city the city should respect their wishes....they'd be (the city) the first to bitch and moan if they wanted the land back from the city

gscully · 14-04-2009 9:57am

merlante wrote: »

Sigh.. hmm.. who were the quakers, lets see:
Penrose/Gatchell - The original Waterford glass. Enough said.
Malcolmson - Built Portlaw as a model factory town. Built the Neptune Shipyard which produced and operated the largest fleet of iron steamers in the world between the mid-1850s and the late-1860s. He employed 1,500. They even issued their own money within a 30 mile radius of Waterford. Built the first Tramore race course.
Jacob - Heard of the cream cracker? He started in Waterford.
Denny - Rashers. Invented in Waterford as a novel way of curing meat.
Cherry - Cherry's brewery on the Quay, now a Guinness brewery.

The quakers were the best thing that ever happened to Waterford. It's a disgrace that people don't know what they did, and it's also a disgrace that we have the disrespect to misuse the land they gave to the city.

...and Sugar Puffs! Don't forget the Sugar Puffs!!!

ziedth · 14-04-2009 10:16am

merlante wrote: »

It's a disgrace that people don't know what they did, and it's also a disgrace that we have the disrespect to misuse the land they gave to the city.

First of all budd i'm not from Waterford City so my lack of knowledge on the quakers is not dis-respecting their achievements. Second, I totally agree with the issue of the land they gave being mis-used being ridiculous.

Cabaal wrote: »

Anyway bottom line is if they gave the land as a gift under conditions to the city the city should respect their wishes....they'd be (the city) the first to bitch and moan if they wanted the land back from the city

Am I right in saying that the Unit is not part of the land in question? because if it is I retract my statement. if the retail unit is on the land they gave as a gift then I would fully understand that they can object to something that they do not agree being there.

However, if the issue is the way I took it up that the front of the premises will be facing the grave yard and not directly involved with the quakers then I stand by that its should be either open to everyone or no-one.

foxylad · 14-04-2009 12:16pm

i think the poker club is going into the empty units under the appartment block -
does anyone know where the graveyard was ?
was it wyse park -
all make no sense to me!

well butty · 14-04-2009 12:42pm

The retail unit does NOT sit on the old graveyard. The graveyard was in the park. Their objection is that the entrance to this club will be facing the old graveyard. I thought religious orders could not dictate what was morally right or wrong anymore????

KingLoser · 14-04-2009 1:14pm

well butty wrote: »

I thought religious orders could not dictate what was morally right or wrong anymore????

Unfortunatly, last Friday should have been a good reminder of how far behind we still are in that regard.

well butty · 14-04-2009 2:02pm

KingLoser wrote: »

Unfortunatly, last Friday should have been a good reminder of how far behind we still are in that regard.

Can you clarify please???

JohnC. · 14-04-2009 2:07pm

I assume he means the lack of alcohol purchasing opportunities.

marlin vs · 14-04-2009 8:26pm

Merlante, there's no Guinness brewery in Waterford, it's owned by Diageo and they make a guinness concentrate mostly for the African market.

Cabaal · 14-04-2009 8:56pm

marlin vs wrote: »

Merlante, there's no Guinness brewery in Waterford, it's owned by Diageo and they make a guinness concentrate mostly for the African market.

This is correct, however it used to be Guinness before they were bought

merlante · 14-04-2009 10:20pm

marlin vs wrote: »

Merlante, there's no Guinness brewery in Waterford, it's owned by Diageo and they make a guinness concentrate mostly for the African market.

That's what I meant.

Aquos76 · 14-04-2009 10:56pm

Isn't the existing location of this gambling club backing on to a grave yard as it is.

I cant really see the harm in relocating it to where they are applying for permission for it

Cabaal · 15-04-2009 7:09am

Aquos76 wrote: »

Isn't the existing location of this gambling club backing on to a grave yard as it is.

I cant really see the harm in relocating it to where they are applying for permission for it

The current premises backs onto a catholic graveyard...different views/beliefs etc

Not all religions are the same

ziedth · 15-04-2009 10:11am

Ok,

Lets for a second remove the Quaker element from the Argument,

Lets say for example I run a Butchers, Pay my Tax's, Employ a few people and provide a service people want. Now I get the oppurtunity to move my shop to Michael street where there is also a Fictitious synagog that I'll be facing now they object because I'll be selling pork. Is this right?

Sully · 15-04-2009 11:53am

ziedth wrote: »

Ok,

Lets for a second remove the Quaker element from the Argument,

Lets say for example I run a Butchers, Pay my Tax's, Employ a few people and provide a service people want. Now I get the oppurtunity to move my shop to Michael street where there is also a Fictitious synagog that I'll be facing now they object because I'll be selling pork. Is this right?

Ill take 2lbs of your best sasusages please.

Cabaal · 15-04-2009 12:20pm

ziedth wrote: »

Ok,

Lets for a second remove the Quaker element from the Argument,

Lets say for example I run a Butchers, Pay my Tax's, Employ a few people and provide a service people want. Now I get the oppurtunity to move my shop to Michael street where there is also a Fictitious synagog that I'll be facing now they object because I'll be selling pork. Is this right?

If the synagog gave land to the city as a "gift" and had a graveyard there then yeah they should have input in it

robtri · 15-04-2009 12:51pm

all I can say is everybody has the right to object to any planning, that is the result of living in a democratic state,

While I disagree with the quakers reasons for the planning objection, I support their right to make the objection,

merlante · 15-04-2009 1:06pm

robtri wrote: »

all I can say is everybody has the right to object to any planning, that is the result of living in a democratic state,

While I disagree with the quakers reasons for the planning objection, I support their right to make the objection,

Actually planning objections are not democratic since only one person gets to vote. It's more like a veto that knocks the application back to Bord Planala... Don't know why people associate planning objections with democratic rights.

well butty · 15-04-2009 2:04pm

Cabaal wrote: »

If the synagog gave land to the city as a "gift" and had a graveyard there then yeah they should have input in it

The property does not sit on the grounds that were given to the City Council!!

And as far as democratic is concerned (if you read the front of the Munster Express), they seem to be pi$$ed with the Council primarily and are now using (or in others opinion abusing), the system to make their point. Totally, undemocratic system!!!

robtri · 15-04-2009 2:07pm

merlante wrote: »

Actually planning objections are not democratic since only one person gets to vote. It's more like a veto that knocks the application back to Bord Planala... Don't know why people associate planning objections with democratic rights.

they are democratic in that anybody can lodge an objection to any planning application...

well butty · 15-04-2009 2:19pm

robtri wrote: »

they are democratic in that anybody can lodge an objection to any planning application...

The most liberal planning system in the Western world. The system as it stands is abused!

merlante · 16-04-2009 9:21am

robtri wrote: »

they are democratic in that anybody can lodge an objection to any planning application...

But they are not democratic in that it only takes one person to send an application to Bord Planala, even if 1,000 people want it to go straight through. The council decision seems far more democratic to me, at least elected representatives vote; but one person unilaterally sending the decision to an unelected body does not, at least, feel democratic even if anyone can actually do it.

robtri · 16-04-2009 9:57am

merlante wrote: »

But they are not democratic in that it only takes one person to send an application to Bord Planala, even if 1,000 people want it to go straight through. The council decision seems far more democratic to me, at least elected representatives vote; but one person unilaterally sending the decision to an unelected body does not, at least, feel democratic even if anyone can actually do it.

I can see what you are saying...
but our planning laws are democratic, everybody can object, so that one persons voice can be heard and given the respect it deserves...
an Bord Planala, don't have to agree with that one person, but that one person has the right to be heard...

merlante · 16-04-2009 2:31pm

robtri wrote: »

I can see what you are saying...
but our planning laws are democratic, everybody can object, so that one persons voice can be heard and given the respect it deserves...
an Bord Planala, don't have to agree with that one person, but that one person has the right to be heard...

Even in that sense, democratic does not necessarily equal good. You wouldn't run a hospital on a democratic basis.

I think you should have to get a few names to object to something, and it's probably for the best the Bord Planala is a bord and not a public vote. Individuals shouldn't have a say in everything, but some individuals are nuts.

well butty · 16-04-2009 7:44pm

robtri wrote: »

I can see what you are saying...
but our planning laws are democratic, everybody can object, so that one persons voice can be heard and given the respect it deserves...
an Bord Planala, don't have to agree with that one person, but that one person has the right to be heard...

Are we sure that everyone's voice is equal when it comes to planning matters??? If you try and please everyone, you will end up with buildings designed by committee. You only have to look at the poor architecture in Waterford relative to the other cities in Ireland. Even, towns like Kilkenny, Athlone and Wexford has surpassed it. Why, because there are too many people in Waterford that know how to work the system. When an application goes before the Board, they generally add conditions by way of compromise for the objector (look at the statistics in An Bord Pleanala) and low and behold, we are left with mediocrity yet again!

foxylad · 16-04-2009 9:49pm

the quakers have objected on moral grounds
in a democratic system in th planning system

Sully · 17-04-2009 8:10am

foxylad wrote: »

the quakers have objected on moral grounds
in a democratic system in th planning system

You seem very close to the whole story. What's your connection?

robtri · 17-04-2009 8:13am

well butty wrote: »

Are we sure that everyone's voice is equal when it comes to planning matters??? I

well depends on how big your brown envelope is......

Micky Dolenz · 17-04-2009 8:18am

robtri wrote: »

all I can say is everybody has the right to object to any planning, that is the result of living in a democratic state,

While I disagree with the quakers reasons for the planning objection, I support their right to make the objection,

:pac::pac:

If your not in politics, you should be

merlante · 17-04-2009 8:48am

well butty wrote: »

Are we sure that everyone's voice is equal when it comes to planning matters??? If you try and please everyone, you will end up with buildings designed by committee. You only have to look at the poor architecture in Waterford relative to the other cities in Ireland. Even, towns like Kilkenny, Athlone and Wexford has surpassed it. Why, because there are too many people in Waterford that know how to work the system. When an application goes before the Board, they generally add conditions by way of compromise for the objector (look at the statistics in An Bord Pleanala) and low and behold, we are left with mediocrity yet again!

What bad architecture do we supposedly have?

ziedth · 17-04-2009 10:03am

robtri wrote: »

I can see what you are saying...
but our planning laws are democratic, everybody can object, so that one persons voice can be heard and given the respect it deserves...
an Bord Planala, don't have to agree with that one person, but that one person has the right to be heard...

Oh hello Brendan :pac:

cityboi · 21-04-2009 3:25pm

aone know where this quaker graveyard is --?
was down that way last night ---
no sign of anything

not even a sign!!!

any one any input???

Sully · 21-04-2009 3:39pm

cityboi wrote: »

aone know where this quaker graveyard is --?
was down that way last night ---
no sign of anything
not even a sign!!!

any one any input???

Why the need for another two accounts?

nkay1985 · 21-04-2009 5:07pm

Sully wrote: »

Why the need for another two accounts?

LOL

Cabaal · 21-04-2009 6:43pm

Sully wrote: »

Why the need for another two accounts?

site bannable offense here on boards

Sully · 22-04-2009 1:50pm

Okay, I am going to close this thread for the moment until we figure out its future. There are a few too many people posting with hidden motives (not the club in question) which I think is unfair and misleading.

Any problems, PM one of the mods.

Topic Closed

Proposed gambling club to overlook graveyard

Comments