ALDI PP overturned

rasper

Just after hearing about this and I was fairly disgusted considering the people who led the charge, turning away jobs at a time like this and for what, who in their right mind could ever put a vote in for Hannigan, his actions are just typical of Irish politics and makes my blood boil

http://www.munster-express.ie/local-news/an-bord-pleanala-rejects-aldi%e2%80%99s-tramore-proposal/

An Bord Pleanála rejects Aldi’s Tramore proposal
By Dermot Keyes. Published on Friday, July 2nd, 2010 at 8:51 am An Bord Pleanála has refused planning permission for the proposed construction of an Aldi store on a two-acre site in Crobally Upper, Tramore.

The news has been described by Deputy Mayor Tom Raine as “another devastating blow” for the county’s biggest town, which many argue remains underserved in terms of large supermarket provision.

However, those who appealed Waterford County Council’s green lighting of the proposal in January, including Town Councillor Blaise Hannigan, will undoubtedly be breathing a sigh of relief.

Other appellants to the proposal included Mary Higgins, Peter Burns (owner of the nearby Riverstown Stores) and RGDATA, a retail umbrella group.

The application for the store was re-lodged by Aldi to Waterford County Council in August of last year, some four years after planning permission was first refused.

“This is another devastating blow to business in the town,” claimed Cllr Raine. “We were just getting over the proposed hotel and golf resort in Garrarus getting knocked by An Bord Pleanála and now Aldi has been given the red light too.”

Cllr Raine continued: “Aldi would have created more jobs for the town- and a supermarket outside of the town centre and have shown other potential investors that companies on the scale of Aldi are willing to invest in our growing town.”

Cllr Raine didn’t spare the critical rod when it came to those who appealed the Aldi proposal.

“In my eyes it’s a shame that a small group of people can stop such a development,” he stated.

Mommam

think its a fairly typical Tramore attitude to be honest we moved here 5yrs ago and I cannot get over how little industry is in the area compared to the likes of Dungarvan. Didnt they turn down the hotel out by Garrus also.

But even little things like the town park the amenities for the children are completely inadequate and if you look at the munster express there is a further delay in that too for planning. Its crazy they're talking about it for ever if only theyd get on and DO.. the town needs it.

Think Tramore is a great little town but there is definitley a section that seem to want to stop ANYTHING coming here

rasper

I reckon if it was another block of soon to be slum housing apartments or an estate of buy to let houses, or even another chipper then an bord pleanala goes ahead no bother.
but a supermarket in a very under utilitised town because the a shop owner objects, accompanied with the local FF councillor and the retailer association and of course an Tasgce , once again makes me sick

alphasounds

In my experience value does not seem to be
a strong argument if some sort political of power is exercised in Tramore.

Stan Nangle

In fairness, there was no issue of "turning away jobs".

The Inspectors Report states that "I would note the population estimation submitted by the applicant for the catchment area is 39,346 in 2014 whereas the L.A.P. expects the population of Tramore Town (although a smaller area than the catchment area) to be 13,637. As Tramore Town is the most significant settlement in the catchment area I would be concerned with applicant’s population projections given that they would be almost three times larger than the population of Tramore for the same period. I would conclude that localised population figures rather than regional figures would provide a more accurate picture in relation to population forecasts."

This figure appears to be based on the assumption that everybody from Dunmore East to Kilmacthomas will shop in Tramore. They seem to forget that the Gateway City for the South East is located 7 miles in the road.

This shop would not have created jobs in the town. It would have forced some other retailers to close down.


Another problem with the application is that it does not address the "Sequential Test". This was one of the reasons it failed the previous time also.

"I would consider that the Sequential Test has not addressed the concerns of the planning inspector and the Board in the previous application (appeal ref. 229113). In this regard I note that some of the sites are discounted due to existing zoning provisions and extant permissions on the site and in this regard the report by the planning inspector in the previous appeal specifically notes that sites should not be dismissed for these reasons. On this basis I would be of the opinion, based on the submitted information, that the appeal site would not be the most appropriate site for the proposed development having regard to the Retail Planning Guidelines, 2005."


This application should never have been granted Planning Permission by Waterford County Council.

The "logic" used by Councillor Raine in his comments is typical of the "logic" used all over the Country to try and justify the unjustifiable.

We have 300,000 houses more than we need. We have a retail footprint equivalent to a population of 14 million. Most of these properties will never be used, but the taxpayer is having to pick up the tab for the cock-ups made by the Councillors.

We have to get away from that craziness, and the way to do that is to follow the planning guidelines, and use common sense when making these decisions - not greed.

Here's the recommendations of the An Bord Pleanala Inspector after he had reviewed all the documentation, and visited the site.

"REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
1. Having regard to the location at a distance from the town centre, the Board is not satisfied that the site is the optimum location for such a development. Furthermore, it is the policy of the planning authority, as set out in the current development plan for the area, to protect the vitality and viability of the town centre. The proposed development would conflict with the provisions of the development plan and the Retail Planning Guidelines for Planning Authorities issued by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in January, 2005, would have an adverse impact on the vitality and viability of the town centre and would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

2. Having regard to the scale of the proposed development on a site not
designated for a neighbourhood centre use in accordance with the Tramore Local Area Plan, 2007 – 2013, it is considered that the proposed development would constitute overdevelopment of the site, would be contrary to Section 5.3 and Figure 5 ‘Strategic Objectives Map’ of the Tramore L.A.P., 2007 – 2013 and would therefore contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area."


It is worth noting that it was the local Councillors who decided on the rules and regulations that are set out in the local Development Plan, and in the Tramore LAP. They are now supporting a development that conflicts with their own rules, just because they were in line for €93,317.66 if it went ahead.

Sully

There is this notion about in Waterford (incl. Tramore) that any development which has the possibility of bringing jobs should be welcomed. Regardless of the consequences. There have been many applications councils in the City and the County which have been approved that the board knocked - and rightly so in many. There is no point in developing something right left and centre purely because its a boost.

There is a lot more to be considered then just the above. The location, who its damaging, what its damaging, its appearance, type of development, safety etc. Having an Aldi slap bang as you come into Tramore isn't the best of locations and I would have said an over development for the area. Its not in the best area in terms of road networks either.

Iv heard the accusation that the board are working against the council/Tramore, something I don't buy into myself.

The hotel was another over development, there was a huge protest against the development and the development would have had a significant impact on the locality. The board refused it and rightly so.

The people of Tramore want jobs, would love fancy hotels and all that boost our local economy and create jobs. But, within reason.

The "small group of people" are within their right to lodge their reasons for appeal and if the board agrees with them, or disagrees with them, so be it. Its a right that should not be interfered with or taken away.

rasper

It all sounds of protectionism to me, I don't understand of how building an Aldi is to be considered over development unless competition is considered
something to be avoided. Local business will either adapt and enjoy the benefits of more Tramore residents staying local for more of their business or wind down because they are ineffcient and make room for a more suitable business model.
Or is they no more room in Tramore for anything else outside of fast food outlets and bookmakers

Stan Nangle

rasper wrote: »

It all sounds of protectionism to me, I don't understand of how building an Aldi is to be considered over development unless competition is considered
something to be avoided. Local business will either adapt and enjoy the benefits of more Tramore residents staying local for more of their business or wind down because they are ineffcient and make room for a more suitable business model.
Or is they no more room in Tramore for anything else outside of fast food outlets and bookmakers

We have plan for how the region should develop, from that we have a plan for how the County should develop, and from that we have a plan for how the Town should develop.

This proposal "conflicts" with these plans, and "is contrary" to these plans.

There is no way the population of Tramore can support another Supermarket, and there is no way that the population of Tramore is going to be almost 40,000 in 2014.

rasper

Aldi thinks it can , and Supervalu and Riverstown stores are only corner shops so we only have two and none on the Pickardstown side

Sully

rasper wrote: »

Aldi thinks it can , and Supervalu and Riverstown stores are only corner shops so we only have two and none on the Pickardstown side

Who says Aldi are right though? I cant see our population in Tramore growing that significantly in such a short space of time - noting we are stuck in a recession (technically) and development of housing estates has slowed down.

Stan Nangle

rasper wrote: »

Aldi thinks it can , and Supervalu and Riverstown stores are only corner shops so we only have two and none on the Pickardstown side

Aldi thinks it can, but the people who built all that empty retail space all over the Country thought the same.

The purpose of having a planning system is to make sure the right things are built in the right place. Councillors all over the Country spent the last ten years trying to prove they were smarter than the planners, and the result is NAMA.

rasper

I was always a strong advocate of sensible planning , but the bord pleanala puts in the boot in on a supermarket after letting all the future slum housing estates and flat complexes go through.
Surely on bord pleanala are more to blame on the state of the countrys bubble than Aldi

Stan Nangle

rasper wrote: »

I was always a strong advocate of sensible planning , but the bord pleanala puts in the boot in on a supermarket after letting all the future slum housing estates and flat complexes go through.
Surely on bord pleanala are more to blame on the state of the countrys bubble than Aldi

The board didn't "put the boot in".

It was asked to review a decision of Waterford County Council, and it did - for the third time.

Likewise with what you term "future slum housing estates and flat complexes". These can only have been built if they were in accordance with the Development Plans set out by the Councillors.

rasper

I'm not defending anyones development plans, just amazed that an bord pleanala turns away a business moving into Tramore when the only objections were from the local corner shop, his buddy ex ff councillor and the retailer association.
Now tell me thats not protectionism

Psychedelic

Stan, your points against the Aldi store are all fair enough, but what annoys me about this is that the people who objected did not do so for the good reasons you stated.

There were a few people who objected because a few trees in that area would be cut down. That's just lame. What's there now is a few trees and an old house which is half burned down. It'll just waste away like that now for god knows how many years.

Then there was Peter Burns objecting because it would be competition to his shop. He said he already provides for the area's shopping needs but he doesn't. Most people in the area (my family included) do their shopping in the supermarkets up town, not in his shop. Some people probably even travel into the Aldi and other supermarkets in Waterford City.

Peter was backed up by Cllr Hannigan, not because of reasons you mentioned, but again just a re-hash of Peter's reasons.

I'm not sure if Aldi would adversely affect the town centre either, sure Lidl and Tesco are not near the town centre.

Stan Nangle

rasper wrote: »

I'm not defending anyones development plans, just amazed that an bord pleanala turns away a business moving into Tramore when the only objections were from the local corner shop, his buddy ex ff councillor and the retailer association.
Now tell me thats not protectionism

It doesn't matter who the objections are from, An Bord Pleanala's job is to review the planning application and see if it complies with the Development Plan.

It didn't, so they turned it down.

If Aldi had put in a planning application that was in accordance with the development plans they would have gotten planning permission. This is the second time they have been turned down, for pretty much the same reasons, on this site.

But you must admit that claiming that Tramore has a population of 39,000 was a bit ridiculous.

Boskowski

Stan Nangle wrote: »

There is no way the population of Tramore can support another Supermarket, and there is no way that the population of Tramore is going to be almost 40,000 in 2014.

Never mind the location and all that.
But here's me thinking the above is the risk of the business owner and in any case whether a certain town supports one or two or five supermarkets will be found out naturally in a free market society won't it? I mean at some stage it felt like we had about a dozen hairdressers, surely Tramore doesn't support that either.

sparkling sea

Stan Nangle wrote: »

It doesn't matter who the objections are from, An Bord Pleanala's job is to review the planning application and see if it complies with the Development Plan.

It didn't, so they turned it down.

If Aldi had put in a planning application that was in accordance with the development plans they would have gotten planning permission. This is the second time they have been turned down, for pretty much the same reasons, on this site.

But you must admit that claiming that Tramore has a population of 39,000 was a bit ridiculous.

Are the development plans facilitating the needs of businesses like Aldi - are they conducive in attracting business to Tramore in your opinion?

I hope the plans for the region, county and town, were not drawn up by the same people who drew up the plans for Waterford City or we are really up the creek. Say it isn't so - please

sunnysoutheast

sparkling sea wrote: »

Are the development plans facilitating the needs of businesses like Aldi - are they conducive in attracting business to Tramore in your opinion?

I hope the plans for the region, county and town, were not drawn up by the same people who drew up the plans for Waterford City or we are really up the creek. Say it isn't so - please

Well no, they were drawn up by Waterford County Council, not Waterford City Council, and all should be available for the relevant public consultation. They should be on the website(s) if you'd care to look and make your informed judgement on whether they are business-friendly.

Tramore has a brand new Tesco, Lidl and neighbourhood centre very close to the main new housing estates and bypass, plus a Supervalu and smaller convenience stores closer in the town itself. The Aldi proposal would have been out on its own and would have caused inevitable and serious congestion at the main entry point into Tramore from Waterford, with a pretty small year-round catchment area. Simply put, it's in the wrong place and has been superseded by the development on the hill.

SSE

sparkling sea

sunnysoutheast wrote: »

Well no, they were drawn up by Waterford County Council, not Waterford City Council, and all should be available for the relevant public consultation. They should be on the website(s) if you'd care to look and make your informed judgement on whether they are business-friendly.

Tramore has a brand new Tesco, Lidl and neighbourhood centre very close to the main new housing estates and bypass, plus a Supervalu and smaller convenience stores closer in the town itself. The Aldi proposal would have been out on its own and would have caused inevitable and serious congestion at the main entry point into Tramore from Waterford, with a pretty small year-round catchment area. Simply put, it's in the wrong place and has been superseded by the development on the hill.

SSE

Can't say I agree with you on the congestion - I wouldn't think there are enough people living here to cause "inevitable and serious congestion" - if however some congestion was caused it would surely mean the consumers were availing of all the potential choices that would be on offer in Tramore and more choice is never a bad thing.

There are an awful lot of people from Waterford City living in Tramore now, many of whom are my neighbours and many of whom still shop in Wateford so although I can see why it might appear that another shopping centre may not be needed - I couldn't agree that the need has been superceded as there is probably room for everyone in consumers minds.

I take your point about on the wrong place although I am still not fully convinced of it.

With regard to the development plan I was more wondering if the consultant agencies were the same as Waterford City Council - any info

sunnysoutheast

sparkling sea wrote: »

Can't say I agree with you on the congestion - I wouldn't think there are enough people living here to cause "inevitable and serious congestion" - if however some congestion was caused it would surely mean the consumers were availing of all the potential choices that would be on offer in Tramore and more choice is never a bad thing.

There are an awful lot of people from Waterford City living in Tramore now, many of whom are my neighbours and many of whom still shop in Wateford so although I can see why it might appear that another shopping centre may not be needed - I couldn't agree that the need has been superceded as there is probably room for everyone in consumers minds.

I take your point about on the wrong place although I am still not fully convinced of it.

With regard to the development plan I was more wondering if the consultant agencies were the same as Waterford City Council - any info

No idea on any consulting agencies, sorry, but the Co.Co. development plan is an interesting read, albeit with large maps to download. From memory I think the "predicted growth" always keeps Dungarvan about 100 people ahead of Tramore!

I'd be a big fan of Aldi but that roundabout backs up enough as it is, leading to the beach, Run Amok etc. as well as being the termination of the ring road. Perhaps Aldi can go in if/when the racecourse sites are redeveloped (not sure of the zoning on those). They now have two refusals on the same site so I don't see much point in making a third.

SSE

sparkling sea

sunnysoutheast wrote: »

No idea on any consulting agencies, sorry, but the Co.Co. development plan is an interesting read, albeit with large maps to download. From memory I think the "predicted growth" always keeps Dungarvan about 100 people ahead of Tramore!

I'd be a big fan of Aldi but that roundabout backs up enough as it is, leading to the beach, Run Amok etc. as well as being the termination of the ring road. Perhaps Aldi can go in if/when the racecourse sites are redeveloped (not sure of the zoning on those). They now have two refusals on the same site so I don't see much point in making a third.

SSE

What does it mean in regards of projected population figures re the development plan as the population as Tramore now exceeds Dungarvan.
The population of County Waterford at present is 62,213. Dungarvan Electoral Area is 18,332, Kilmacthomas 8,186, Lismore 9,435, Suir 7,315 and Tramore 18,945. The deviations from the county average range from -12.79% in Lismore to +16.75% in Tramore.
Does this mean that the County Council where wrong regarding population growth? Will this impact at all on the development plans?
Will Tramore now get the 7 seats on the Council and Dungarvan 6 - this could have changed already, I don't no if its has or not but surely Tramore should have more representatives if there are more people?

oilcanharry

As a Tramore person it never ceases to amaze me that there seems to be an objection culture in the town. Is there any development outside of Housing extates, bookies & pubs that have not been objected to?

When an idea is put forward for consideration, how comes such a meal and hash is made out of doing anything that benefits the people of the town?

Have any of our elected representatives who can offer so much information on the reasons why applications were refused or the reasons why we should not have such developments such as Aldi or a Hotel / Golf Course in Garrus actually sat down with Aldi and the county planners to come up with a solution that suits all?

Looking around the county and south east region, Tramore seems to be very much lacking behind for inward investment. Why is that I wonder?