Greens helped scupper Drogs' stadium

SectionF wrote: »

Frank Connolly has a piece in Village Magazine telling how a Green Party councillor played a key role in frustrating the development that included a new stadium for Drogheda Utd.

The Greens played a key role in stopping the complete destruction of Drogheda.

Fair play!

Anybody see the property market lately?

I read what was used as evidence for posting this thread in the link in the op. The article is not complete and it does not give us the opportunity to make up our own minds. It just has small excerpts from what was said in another article.

The link in the op contains the name of a publication only available in print and not available online to anybody who would wish to make certain of the claims made here.

There seems to be claims made also that this councillor makes his way to Britain to games every weekend.

The article linked to this thread does not have any clear proof of anything and the claims are not backed up fully.

It says that there were two local councillors involved but only names one.

There are articles printed in national newspapers regarding the planning for this venture.

So I've added two relevant articles regarding the planning of this development.

Link here for below article

Seventeen developers and landowners in Meath will lodge a joint submission tomorrow urging the local council to revise a controversial area development plan.

All members of the group - who own an estimated 300 acres in the area - have an interest in what are known as the Bryanstown lands.

Those lands had been earmarked for possible development in a major regional planning strategy.

The recent plan, however, reversed that earlier decision. The new plan has also earmarked lands for fast-track development which were previously designated for long-term development.

A number of serious allegations regarding the way in which the planning authority has operated were made to the Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, and minister of state Dick Roche.

Dublin developer Bill Doyle has threatened to take a High Court action over the affair, and Roche wrote to environment minister John Gormley urging him to instigate a probe.

In his letter, Roche said that the proposals which the council came up with clearly disadvantaged some land owners in the area.

Roche, a former environment minister, accused the council of behaving in an ‘‘inexplicable’’ fashion.

And link here for the following.

A NEW 10,000-seater soccer stadium plan has been branded "premature" by the National Roads Authority (NRA) because the motorway junction beside it is expected to be the starting point of a huge new ring road.

Earlier this year, Meath County Council agreed to contravene its development plan so permission could be granted for the €65m Drogheda United stadium, leisure centre, retail units and a motorway service station. The 25-hectare site is on the southside of Drogheda within the Co Meath boundary. It is on the Drogheda to Duleek road and beside the Duleek road junction with the M1.

An Bord Pleanala is not expected to make a decision until later this year.

The NRA appeal is the only one against permission and its submission says the proposed €2bn Dublin Outer Orbital Road linking Drogheda to Naas "is likely to begin at the M1/R152 Duleek road junction".

The route is a key objective of the regional planning guidelines for the greater Dublin area and the planning application "is premature pending determination of this route", argues the NRA.

Traffic

The NRA says the junction would have to be upgraded to support the traffic flow described in the application. Because the junction is part of the motorway public private partnership (PPP) contract, it "will be much more difficult complex and expensive" to upgrade.

Meanwhile, Councillor Tommy Byrne (FF) called on Drogheda borough council to "write to the NRA and ask them to withdraw their objection".

Mr Byrne did not get the support of his fellow councillors but they did agree to put their support for planning permission in writing. At Drogheda United's current ground, United Park, planning permission was secured for 110 residential units, but that too is under appeal.

Yes Cudden is mentioned in one of the quotes from the article which is not available online, but the person responsible for this online article only mentions the Green Party councillor.

And my mistake on the bit regarding them going to Britain.

SectionF wrote: »

Since two of your assertions in relation to my post have been shown to be false, I'll just address this one.
The article referred to is in the public domain, carried in a nationally published news magazine. I'm afraid I cannot be responsible for Village Magazine's online policies, nor am I prepared to breach copyright and transcribe or scan the article, but if you really want the full story then it shouldn't trouble you too much to find it.
It remains a matter of record, according to Village, that the insistence of Cllr Kelly on the inclusion of other lands in the area plan meant that the Drogs development was unviable.

Its quite clear that two councillors were together on this, so why are we only concentrating on one name.
I find it startling that it was a Green Party member and an independent, but there was no objection from what you are saying from any of the major parties' councillors.
I'd like to see a full copy of this publication, as the excerpts taken from it and used in the online article might not tell the whole story as has often been the case with partial excerpts all over the world.

It does not say in that article what the exact reasons for those objections were.
Could they have possibly been environmental?

And more questions for you.

Had this planning received the thumbs up from the NRA and/or An Bord Pleanala?

At what stage of the planning had these objections arisen?

SectionF wrote: »

Because one is an independent and only of local relevance.

That I have a problem with. Cllr Kelly is a Green Party rep, but there is nothing presented here to suggest that he was/is acting on his party's national policy in relation to the planning process for Drogs stadium. Both Cllrs may have been acting based on local concerns, as such I think it is misleading to say the Greens helped scupper Drogs plans without providing more info re. the entire planning process.

I tried four separate shops yesterday to find a copy of Village, none had copies in stock. I hope to get a copy tomorrow.

SectionF wrote: »

I must say, this desire to see each politician in any given situation accorded equal attention is an innovation in political debate.

It's not a political debate, it's a football debate that's dealing with related political actions, I think that might explain the lack of partisanship (certainly on my behalf)

SectionF wrote: »

I don't know whether Kelly was acting according to his party's nationally determined policy, and I haven't represented him as doing so.

Does the thread title misrepresent the party itself? That would appear to be the crux of the issue.

SectionF wrote: »

I'm sorry. I'm not clear what you mean by that.

I thought it was clear enough.

this desire to see each politician in any given situation accorded equal attention is an innovation in political debate

This isn't a political debate, it's a debate about a sporting issue, but one that has obvious political implications. I don't see why one needs to concentrate on the role of one individual over another, from the limited information available on your link it appears two Cllrs were involved in the process. Why is the Green Party Cllr singled out for attention, and why does your blog state that the "Greens helped compost Drogs’ dream"?

As it is, we have only the link you provided (which is a blog which you are involved in?) which provides two small paragraphs from Connolly's article in a larger editorial piece, to support that claim.

SectionF wrote: »

Assuming that the Village account is accurate, the only way in which the thread title would misrepresent the party would be as a consequence of its elected councillor having misrepresented it.

I think a more accurate representation of the events would be "Green Party Cllr helped scupper Drogs stadium" based on what's been presented to date, unless there's anything to suggest that the planning objections were a policy of the Green Party and the Cllr was acting on Party instructions. Anyone who thinks that local Cllrs slavishly follow diktats from Part headquarters needs their head examined IMO.

The Cllr in question is a resident of Laytown and is a representative in the Slane area, would you say that Slane residents helped scupper Drogs plans? They did elect him after all.

Interestingly, this article deals with some of the fall out from the decision, and shows how Finna Fails' Dick Roche (TD) and Fine Gaels' Shane McEntee (TD) both called for enquiries into planning decisions in Meath CC, Roche called on his govt colleague (and Green Party TD) John Gormley as his successor at the Dept of Environment to initiate an inquiry, and McEntee objected on the grounds that the Drogs development would have addressed key infrastructure concerns in re. to population growth.

Councillors, however, took umbrage at the report that Deputy McEntee had sought an examination of planning decisions over 10 years in Meath.

Laytown Slane Area councillor Tom Kelly said that if the development could not now start, it was out of Meath County Council’s control. The council, he said, had materially contravened the Meath County Development Plan to grant permission for this project.

Slane area councillor Jimmy Cudden added that the council had tried to help “fast-track” the development.

Councillors, including Slane area member, Ann Dillon Gallagher, were upset over the report in the Sunday Business Post on the basis that the council had helped Drogheda Utd at all times.

Councillor Brian Fitzgerald wanted an investigation by the council into the entire matter, focusing on events leading up to the time when the members took their decision on the material contravention proposal. He said: “We want to retain our integrity and protect it.”

Councillor Tommy Reilly said he detected a slur against the members, staff and officials of the council and supported Cllr Fitzgerald in his call for an investigation.

Gallagher is FG, Fitzgerald is an Independent, and Reilly is FF. It would seem there's more to this than a solitary Green Party Cllr.