Croke Park residents to seek concert injuctions.....your opinions?

hynesie08 · 02-06-2014 12:06PM

Mr.S wrote: »

Given the number of residents and households in the Croke Park area, 375 is pretty low.

"hundreds complain" is a bit of a non story. The €20 submission fee is comical.

From reading the article, it seems like most of the complaints were filed by RA's on behalf of their members, so no way of knowing how many people would've complained individually.

375 might not seem a lot but I'm guessing 375 well worded objections will be received better than 5000 "some bogger **** in me letterbox" type complaints.

Guy:Incognito · 02-06-2014 12:07PM

bumper234 wrote: »

Each objection costs €20 so you think the residents association should have spent €120k ?

Each resident that felt they needed to object should have paid the 20 yes. That's the point of the objection process.

If your not bothered enough by it to spend twenty quid are you really that bothered?

bumper234 · 02-06-2014 12:08PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Each resident that felt they needed to object should have paid the 20 yes. That's the point of the objection process.

If your not bothered enough by it to spend twenty quid are you really that bothered?

See above posts.

hynesie08 · 02-06-2014 12:11PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Each resident that felt they needed to object should have paid the 20 yes. That's the point of the objection process.

If your not bothered enough by it to spend twenty quid are you really that bothered?

And the point of an RA is to act on behalf of its residents, which it's doing. Plus if your ra has fees, they're intended for things like this.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-06-2014 12:21PM

So, excuse the ignorance, but is the council required to comment on the objections, or say why it's giving or not giving permission to the applicant?

bumper234 · 02-06-2014 12:25PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

So, excuse the ignorance, but is the council required to comment on the objections, or say why it's giving or not giving permission to the applicant?

Not sure of the process myself but would presume every objection would have to be looked at individually and replied to.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-06-2014 12:27PM

bumper234 wrote: »

Not sure of the process myself but would presume every objection would have to be looked at individually and replied to.

Be interesting to read what they said about the objections after granting a license.

bumper234 · 02-06-2014 12:29PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Be interesting to read what they said about the objections after granting a license.

Still subject to licence.

Makes liars out of those who claimed here last week that licences had been granted when it turns out the objections haven't even been read/decided on

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-06-2014 12:36PM

bumper234 wrote: »

Still subject to licence.

Makes liars out of those who claimed here last week that licences had been granted when it turns out the objections haven't even been read/decided on

Written badly - I meant "after" in a hypothetical sense.

bumper234 · 02-06-2014 12:39PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Written badly - I meant "after" in a hypothetical sense.

I know what you mean, you're right it will be interesting to hear their explanation as to why they grant the licences if they decide to grant all 5.

circular flexing · 02-06-2014 08:28PM

Mr.S wrote: »

Why didn't the RA suggest that each resident submit their own complaint directly, and pay the fee themselves?

Thousands (which I doubt there would be) versus a low 375 would surely have more of an impact, no?

If residents cared that much then the €20 fee wouldn't be an issue!

The way for doing planning objections if you are a group of residents isto just submit a single objection on behalf of the residents. If each resident submitted an individual objection, it would create an awful amount of work for the council (which may be counterproductive) as each objection has to be acknowledged. And as pointed out elsewhere, writing a reasoned, well thought out objection is hard and arguably one good objection is stronger than a thousand average ones.

In any case, I think 375 is a large number of objections. I don't even think they Phoenix Park concerts last year had that many and there was even actual trouble during the concerts there in 2012.

stefan idiot jones · 02-06-2014 08:55PM

I'd see it as weight of numbers as opposed to a well written letter would make the biggest impact.

A well written letter with 6000 genuine signatures backing it's content would have the most influence?

When petitions are signed, it's always about how many people signed isn't it?

end of the road · 02-06-2014 09:35PM

bumper234 wrote: »

So the residents association should have put in 6000 single complaints at a cost of €120k or would it not be more prudent to put in the 375 complaints on behalf of the 6000 residents?

they should have only put in the amount that genuinely objected and not some random number

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-06-2014 09:44PM

end of the road wrote: »

they should have only put in the amount that genuinely objected and not some random number

Fristly, 6000 is not a random number - read back.

Secondly - why? Because then it might fit this weird argument that the number of residents that object is exagerated?

Was it exagerated in 2009 when they actually obsructed the U2 concerts and forced this three-concerts-per-year agreement in the first place?

If the residents weren't objecting to the concerts in large numbers, we wouldn't be having this discussion, now would we?

bumper234 · 02-06-2014 10:06PM

end of the road wrote: »

they should have only put in the amount that genuinely objected and not some random number

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

ure :rolleyes:

end of the road · 02-06-2014 10:29PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Fristly, 6000 is not a random number - read back.

6000 people didn't object though

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Secondly - why? Because then it might fit this weird argument that the number of residents that object is exagerated?

it must be exagerated if they have to pluck a random number out of thin air to submit objections to the council

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Was it exagerated in 2009 when they actually obsructed the U2 concerts and forced this three-concerts-per-year agreement in the first place?

i suspect it was, and they didn't force a 3 concerts agreement, the planning stipulation given by the council was 3 concerts without having to apply for an events licence any more and they would have to apply for an events licence, they have done as such.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

If the residents weren't objecting to the concerts in large numbers, we wouldn't be having this discussion, now would we?

but their not objecting in large numbers

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-06-2014 10:45PM

end of the road wrote: »

6000 people didn't object though

it must be exagerated if they have to pluck a random number out of thin air to submit objections to the council

i suspect it was, and they didn't force a 3 concerts agreement, the planning stipulation given by the council was 3 concerts without having to apply for an events licence any more and they would have to apply for an events licence, they have done as such.

but their not objecting in large numbers

1 - Never said they did - I said the number was not pulled out of thin air.
2 - See above - again, there is a basis for this number, be it accurate or not.
3 - Clearly they weren't, or the GAA would have not waster their time consuluting with them or entering into any agreements with them.
4 -

chinguetti · 02-06-2014 10:48PM

Regardless of any other agreement with the council or any other body, the 3 concerts a year agreement was with the residents bodies I think.

Also, the GAA/Croke Park have admitted that they didn't consult with the residents prior to announcing the Garth concerts (and no, I don't have a link for that but I'm fairly sure it was in the Irish Times recently).

So I would think that the residents would have little faith in anything that Croke Park would agree to do in future and you couldn't really blame them.

In my opinion, the concerts are going to go ahead as if they don't, there would be major knock on effects for all outdoor gigs in the country in future (no gig gets a licence before selling tickets).

However, Croke Park may have shot themselves in the foot long term as they have broken an agreement they had freely entered into with various resident groups and then an independent consultation process with all residents within a kilometer of the stadium that they then ignored/failed to implement. If it does go down the court route, those things will go against them.

John_Rambo · 02-06-2014 11:10PM

chinguetti wrote: »

In my opinion, the concerts are going to go ahead as if they don't, there would be major knock on effects for all outdoor gigs in the country in future (no gig gets a licence before selling tickets).

However, Croke Park may have shot themselves in the foot long term as they have broken an agreement they had freely entered into with various resident groups and then an independent consultation process with all residents within a kilometer of the stadium that they then ignored/failed to implement. If it does go down the court route, those things will go against them.

Yeah, good post. They have shot more than just their own foot, I'd say other venues, organisers and their sponsors are cursing them. Landsdowne road (and their sponsor, Aviva), RDS along with Marley Park and Phoenix park's future gigs will be heavily scrutinised because of the awful handling of this fiasco. The Point Depot (and their sponsor, O2) would be less affected giving that they are actually an events building.

Amateurish, bullish, selfish, money grabbing and unfortunate. Pretty unfair to the Garth Brooks fans too in fairness. From what I can gather some have spent a lot of money on hotels etc... to see all five gigs.

Psychobabble · 02-06-2014 11:12PM

Just to clarify, these were not objections to a planning application, per se, but rather, 'observations' on a Public Event Licence. As such, there was no fee associated, whether the observation was pro or con. Will be interesting to see how many observations favoured the event, given the fact that so many tickets have already been sold, 'subject to licence' of course; it was open to any person within the State to lodge an observation either for or against the concerts. How many posters on this thread officially voiced their opinions? Anyway, under the law, it's not so much the volume of negative/positive observations, rather the quality of those observations under law, which should carry weight.

Guy:Incognito · 02-06-2014 11:48PM

Psychobabble wrote: »

Just to clarify, these were not objections to a planning application, per se, but rather, 'observations' on a Public Event Licence. As such, there was no fee associated, whether the observation was pro or con. Will be interesting to see how many observations favoured the event, given the fact that so many tickets have already been sold, 'subject to licence' of course; it was open to any person within the State to lodge an observation either for or against the concerts. How many posters on this thread officially voiced their opinions? Anyway, under the law, it's not so much the volume of negative/positive observations, rather the quality of those observations under law, which should carry weight.

I'd say one can safely assume that the what, 400,000 people that bought tickets, all fall in to the "observations in favour" column.

Psychobabble · 02-06-2014 11:55PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I'd say one can safely assume that the what, 400,000 people that bought tickets, all fall in to the "observations in favour" column.

Not if they didn't officially lodge an observation. To repeat, who actually lodged observations? Any posters here who have bought tickets or residents? Regardless, the quality, under law, as opposed to the quantity, is actually determinate.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 03-06-2014 12:02AM

Psychobabble wrote: »

Not if they didn't officially lodge an observation. To repeat, who actually lodged observations? Any posters here who have bought tickets or residents? Regardless, the quality, under law, as opposed to the quantity, is actually determinate.

Could get interestign if thats the case.

Guy:Incognito · 03-06-2014 12:18AM

Psychobabble wrote: »

Not if they didn't officially lodge an observation. To repeat, who actually lodged observations? Any posters here who have bought tickets or residents? Regardless, the quality, under law, as opposed to the quantity, is actually determinate.

So if one person that bought a ticket lodges an observation in.favour of the gig can they assume the support of the other 399,999?
If the ra. We're lodging a joint objection why we're 375 separate ones lodged?

hynesie08 · 03-06-2014 12:25AM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

So if one person that bought a ticket lodges an observation in.favour of the gig can they assume the support of the other 399,999?
If the ra. We're lodging a joint objection why we're 375 separate ones lodged?

No, unless he talks to every other person who buys a ticket, gets their opinion and their permission to act on their behalf.

There was a massive attempt by croke park locals to gather opinion, even I got a leaflet and I live in phibsboro, if they are lodging these complaints, they have the agreement of the majority of residents.

end of the road · 03-06-2014 12:32AM

hynesie08 wrote: »

No, unless he talks to every other person who buys a ticket, gets their opinion and their permission to act on their behalf.

There was a massive attempt by croke park locals to gather opinion, even I got a leaflet and I live in phibsboro, if they are lodging these complaints, they have the agreement of the majority of residents.

but they mustn't if only 300 and something objections were lodged

hynesie08 · 03-06-2014 12:42AM

end of the road wrote: »

but they mustn't if only 300 and something objections were lodged

Yes by the ra's on behalf of the residents. Do you actually want them to register an objection in the name of every single resident?

end of the road · 03-06-2014 01:07AM

hynesie08 wrote: »

Yes by the ra's on behalf of the residents. Do you actually want them to register an objection in the name of every single resident?

yes, or at least ask each resident whether they would like an objection to be raised on their behalf

hynesie08 · 03-06-2014 01:24AM

end of the road wrote: »

yes, or at least ask each resident whether they would like an objection to be raised on their behalf

I agree, they should have. Maybe through a door to door leaflet drop? Or a series of ra meetings? Something like that you mean?

osarusan · 03-06-2014 01:30AM

Up the ra.

Croke Park residents to seek concert injuctions.....your opinions?

Comments