Inspiral_Carpet Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 I hope the new hotel that was given planning permission last night isn't a fly in the ointment. It is providing the very same facilities that are cited as presently being lacking in the borough and thus was positive reason for approving the Latics Hotel http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/NEWSW17.html blu I can't see it being a problem. The whole area is ridiculously short of hotels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest amoweb Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Where is Plumpton Clough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Thanks for the update Diego. Having got himself involved with the residents' group earlier in the year (around election time wasn't it?), I hope Cllr Bashforth keeps his promise to step out during discussion of these applications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 10, 2007 Author Share Posted October 10, 2007 (edited) Having got himself involved with the residents' group earlier in the year (around election time wasn't it?), I hope Cllr Bashforth keeps his promise to step out during discussion of these applications. The Members of the Planning Committee in the Labour controlling group are: Councillors Bashforth, Dawson, J. Jones, Iqbal, Larkin and Sutcliffe. There are also four Lib/Dem Members and one Conservative. Councillor Bashforth is the Chairman of the Planning Committee. If he does leave the meeting for discussion of these applications, Councillor J. Jones (Vice-Chairman) will take over the Chair. Whoever is in the Chair has a casting vote in the event of an equality of votes. Therefore if one member is absent or abstains from voting, or if Councillor Bashforth leaves the meeting, it will leave ten Members. It could quite easily be five for and five against and would be dependent on which way the Chairman/Acting Chairman had voted, because he or she could then vote again to decide the matter. If all the Labour Members vote in favour the Applications will be approved. Edited October 11, 2007 by Diego_Sideburns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 I hope the new hotel that was given planning permission last night isn't a fly in the ointment. It is providing the very same facilities that are cited as presently being lacking in the borough and thus was positive reason for approving the Latics Hotel http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/NEWSW17.html blu That hotel is being built to support the new Rochdale Business Park at the same location. With it being a De Vere hotel it won't be that cheap so I'm sure there is still scope for Travel Inn type accomodation close by which could be the type of thing planned for the Latics hotel. With it only being a few miles away it could be a good alternative for people visiting the Rochdale Business Park. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 11, 2007 Author Share Posted October 11, 2007 That hotel is being built to support the new Rochdale Business Park at the same location. With it being a De Vere hotel it won't be that cheap so I'm sure there is still scope for Travel Inn type accomodation close by which could be the type of thing planned for the Latics hotel. With it only being a few miles away it could be a good alternative for people visiting the Rochdale Business Park. There is already Travel Inn type accommodation adjacent to the John Milne at Milnrow and adjacent to the Clayton Green near BP. The Report to be considered by the Planning Committee says that the proposed hotel will "undoubtably improve the overall tourism offer". I take "improve" to mean that the hotel will be of a higher standard than the Travel Inn type, otherwise it would have used the word "increase" instead of "improve". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 There is already Travel Inn type accommodation adjacent to the John Milne at Milnrow and adjacent to the Clayton Green near BP. The Report to be considered by the Planning Committee says that the proposed hotel will "undoubtably improve the overall tourism offer". I take "improve" to mean that the hotel will be of a higher standard than the Travel Inn type, otherwise it would have used the word "increase" instead of "improve". I would be surprised if it was a travel inn type! The one at bolton is 4 or 5 stars. I would imagine something similar is being planned. Otherwise it would cheapen the whole thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 11, 2007 Author Share Posted October 11, 2007 Having got himself involved with the residents' group earlier in the year (around election time wasn't it?), I hope Cllr Bashforth keeps his promise to step out during discussion of these applications. The relevant parts of an article by Carl Marsden in the Oldham Advertiser published on 25th April 2007 are: “I won't rule on Latics' stadium, says planning boss PLANNING Committee chairman Steven Bashforth has denied any impropriety after assisting a residents’ group opposed to Oldham Athletic’s multi-million redevelopment plans for Boundary Park. Concerned club officials sought clarification after learning that Cllr Bashforth was set to chair a protest meeting against their recently-submitted planning application tomorrow night. Cllr Bashforth also confirmed to the Advertiser that he had printed leaflets advertising the meeting for the ‘Residents Together’ group and booked their meeting venue. However, the Royton South member insists he was simply helping his constituents in the same way he would assist any community group and has now pledged to remove himself from the final decision-making process. “I have no intention to abuse my position as chair of planning and would not knowingly do so,“ he said. “I do not believe I have acted improperly here and believe that I have a strong responsibility and moral duty to listen to constituents' concerns and give them the best advice I can.” He added: “However, I don’t think it is now possible for me to chair the residents’ meeting. I also don’t think I will be able to chair the planning meeting that discusses this and will likely leave the room and defer to my deputy. “It has been difficult but you often walk a tightrope with issues like this when you’re obliged to help constituents on the one hand while also wanting to be careful not to be seen as taking sides.” Alan Hardy, Latics’ chief executive, said officials’ concerns had heightened when they saw the leaflet carrying the names of Cllr Bashforth and his ward colleague Cllr Phil Harrison. “We were alarmed that a hand-out opposing the plans was distributed with the names of two councillors on it; one of whom chairs the planning committee making the final decision,” he said. “We had obvious concerns about rules and impartiality but – after consultations with Cllr Bashforth and colleagues – we understand he will not chair either meeting if he thinks his position has been compromised.” I have sent an email to the Council seeking clarification about whether Councillor Bashforth intends to vacate the Chair and leave the meeting during discussion of the two Planning Applications relating to BP. I’ll report back when I receive a reply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 The relevant parts of an article by Carl Marsden in the Oldham Advertiser published on 25th April 2007 are: “I won't rule on Latics' stadium, says planning boss PLANNING Committee chairman Steven Bashforth has denied any impropriety after assisting a residents’ group opposed to Oldham Athletic’s multi-million redevelopment plans for Boundary Park. Concerned club officials sought clarification after learning that Cllr Bashforth was set to chair a protest meeting against their recently-submitted planning application tomorrow night. Cllr Bashforth also confirmed to the Advertiser that he had printed leaflets advertising the meeting for the ‘Residents Together’ group and booked their meeting venue. However, the Royton South member insists he was simply helping his constituents in the same way he would assist any community group and has now pledged to remove himself from the final decision-making process. “I have no intention to abuse my position as chair of planning and would not knowingly do so,“ he said. “I do not believe I have acted improperly here and believe that I have a strong responsibility and moral duty to listen to constituents' concerns and give them the best advice I can.” He added: “However, I don’t think it is now possible for me to chair the residents’ meeting. I also don’t think I will be able to chair the planning meeting that discusses this and will likely leave the room and defer to my deputy. “It has been difficult but you often walk a tightrope with issues like this when you’re obliged to help constituents on the one hand while also wanting to be careful not to be seen as taking sides.” Alan Hardy, Latics’ chief executive, said officials’ concerns had heightened when they saw the leaflet carrying the names of Cllr Bashforth and his ward colleague Cllr Phil Harrison. “We were alarmed that a hand-out opposing the plans was distributed with the names of two councillors on it; one of whom chairs the planning committee making the final decision,” he said. “We had obvious concerns about rules and impartiality but – after consultations with Cllr Bashforth and colleagues – we understand he will not chair either meeting if he thinks his position has been compromised.” I have sent an email to the Council seeking clarification about whether Councillor Bashforth intends to vacate the Chair and leave the meeting during discussion of the two Planning Applications relating to BP. I’ll report back when I receive a reply. Good man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 I suggest making sure the Chron and Advertiser are reminded of his promise as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 11, 2007 Author Share Posted October 11, 2007 I suggest making sure the Chron and Advertiser are reminded of his promise as well. No sooner said than done - emails sent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Anyone notice the bit about phasing the housing development to ensure that the resources generated are used to fund the development of the football ground (page 9, 4th para). A very sensible idea from the planning people there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Dowds Green Shirt Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Just a note of caution to you all. There is a very very strong possibility that the decision next week will be deferred. A post earlier in the thread referred to the holding objection from the Highways Agency. This is still in place and is unlikely to be removed before next Wednesdays planning meting. The reason it is in place is that the H.A. are waiting for the results of a survey (I don't know the full details of what the highways survey is ) which are unlikely to be available before the meeting. Whilst I understand that Councilors will have sufficient information to make a judgement on the applications, with the strength of objections from local residents, it is likely that members will defer to await the results of the survey and whether the H.A. will then withdraw their holding objection. By deferring the decision to wait for the H.A. the Councillors will reduce any opportunity for a legal challenge from residents in the event that they approve the applications. I must stress that this is regular practice and should not in any way ring alarm bells for us or the club. In the short term it may be frustrating, but in the medium to long term it will probably benefit us. I don't mean to alarm ppl but please dont all blow up if, as I expect, this happens next Wednesday. By the way, the issue about the bats is now standard practice in relation to planning applications. The presence of bats does not necessarily prevent development proceeding and I am sure the club and their consultants are fully aware and have probably already had the necessary bat survey carried out and have proposals at the ready. Cheers Harry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 11, 2007 Author Share Posted October 11, 2007 I have sent an email to the Council seeking clarification about whether Councillor Bashforth intends to vacate the Chair and leave the meeting during discussion of the two Planning Applications relating to BP. I’ll report back when I receive a reply. I've recieved the reply from Christine Chester of OMBC who states: "Hi I have spoken to Councillor Bashforth who has informed me that he has sought advice on this and has been advised that there is no reason why he should not chair the meeting, as he has not given a definite view on the application, either to residents or to the applicant and he has not prejudged the application. He is quite comfortable that whilst he has listened to both parties concerns and aspirations he has in no way prejudged the issue and provided that he declares an interest in respect of the meetings that he had with residents and OAFC directors and therefore he will be able to, and intends to, chair the meeting. Regards Christine" The grammatical and punctuation errors are Christine's, not mine, but I won't start on that all over again! I've also received a reply from Carl Marsden at the Advertiser who is unable to say anything 'on the record'. However, I trust Carl and I can say that I am content for the Planning Applications to be considered with Councillor Bashforth in the Chair. I ask you to accept the position and trust me on this one. From what Harry Dowd's Green Shirt says, there is every chance that consideration of the applications will be deferred until the Highways Agency's survey is completed. This would be frustrating but, as we've waited all this time, we might as well wait another month or so, to avoid possible longer delays in future, should the objectors challenge the fact that decisions were reached without the benefit of the HA survey results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 (edited) I've recieved the reply from Christine Chester of OMBC who states: "Hi I have spoken to Councillor Bashforth who has informed me that he has sought advice on this and has been advised that there is no reason why he should not chair the meeting, as he has not given a definite view on the application, either to residents or to the applicant and he has not prejudged the application. He is quite comfortable that whilst he has listened to both parties concerns and aspirations he has in no way prejudged the issue and provided that he declares an interest in respect of the meetings that he had with residents and OAFC directors and therefore he will be able to, and intends to, chair the meeting. Regards Christine" The grammatical and punctuation errors are Christine's, not mine, but I won't start on that all over again! I've also received a reply from Carl Marsden at the Advertiser who is unable to say anything 'on the record'. However, I trust Carl and I can say that I am content for the Planning Applications to be considered with Councillor Bashforth in the Chair. I ask you to accept the position and trust me on this one. From what Harry Dowd's Green Shirt says, there is every chance that consideration of the applications will be deferred until the Highways Agency's survey is completed. This would be frustrating but, as we've waited all this time, we might as well wait another month or so, to avoid possible longer delays in future, should the objectors challenge the fact that decisions were reached without the benefit of the HA survey results. I dont see how he can chair it......i just dont! If there is any doubt that this man may have already made his mind up and his on the side of the residents then surely it is maddness to have him chair the meeting!!! If we dont get the stadium an awful lot of is going to fly this guys way. How the hell can this not be a conflict of interest ??? I dont see how Carl or yourself would know anything more than anyone else ?? The guy has been helping residents to organise anti development meetings....is that not true....because that is worrying as hell! What more could Carl know which makes this ok ? The panel should have a open mind....Im not buying this guys is sitting down at the table with a open mind! Edited October 11, 2007 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Diego, excellent piece of work there. Many thanks. To be fair, having read Christine Chester's reply I'm willing to accept the position. It was certainly worth seeking the clarification though. I won't be able to get to the meeting myself - it'll be very interesting to find out who says what. As Harry Dowd's Green Shirt has mentioned, I believe it is now 99% certain the applications will be deferred to allow completion of the HA survey. As Harry also says, although frustrating this should not be a cause for alarm. It's also worth reiterating that the Planning Officer's recommendation is by no means an indication of how the vote may go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 It's also worth reiterating that the Planning Officer's recommendation is by no means an indication of how the vote may go. Thats very true, but if the planning officer had said no then im 99% sure the answer from the committe would of been no as well..... at least we have someone on our side... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 11, 2007 Author Share Posted October 11, 2007 I dont see how he can chair it......i just dont! If there is any doubt that this man may have already made his mind up and his on the side of the residents then surely it is maddness to have him chair the meeting!!! If we dont get the stadium an awful lot of is going to fly this guys way. How the hell can this not be a conflict of interest ??? I dont see how Carl or yourself would know anything more than anyone else ?? The guy has been helping residents to organise anti development meetings....is that not true....because that is worrying as hell! What more could Carl know which makes this ok ? The panel should have a open mind....Im not buying this guys is sitting down at the table with a open mind! The link sets out the Part of the Council's Constitution relating to the Code of Conduct for Councillors. Councillor Bashforth has a duty to comply with this Code and only he knows in what capacity he has attended meetings with residents and OAFC. See Part 2 from page 6 onwards: http://www.oldham.gov.uk/constitution_-_part_05.pdf Christine Chester's reply states what Councillor Bashforth sees as his position, having taken advice on the matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 The link sets out the Part of the Council's Constitution relating to the Code of Conduct for Councillors. Councillor Bashforth has a duty to comply with this Code and only he knows in what capacity he has attended meetings with residents and OAFC. See Part 2 from page 6 onwards: http://www.oldham.gov.uk/constitution_-_part_05.pdf Christine Chester's reply states what Councillor Bashforth sees as his position, having taken advice on the matter. Well it will be intresting to see which way Councillor Bashforth vote goes..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alec1954 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 (edited) Well it will be intresting to see which way Councillor Bashforth vote goes..... Remember that Bashforth acted before the elections. I had contact with another Councillor before the elections on this and other matters and he was very upfront and forthcoming. Then the elections.....then all quiet. Once elected they revert to their true colours. And there is another matter that I cannot print here where he has done "something" else. The club are aware. Lets hope that the decsion to redevelop is given otherwise it may get very dirty. Edited October 11, 2007 by Alec1954 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 15, 2007 Author Share Posted October 15, 2007 (edited) Tonight's rarely wrong Chron has broken its silence. Its story, on the front page with a picture of how the redevelopment will look, reads: "Planners back Latics stadium PLANNING officers say the new-look Latics stadium should go ahead, but it may be November before councillors make a final decision by JANICE BARKER OLDHAM’S new multi-million pound stadium at Boundary Park should go ahead, planning officers say, but it could be another month before a ruling is made. The scheme will be considered by the planning committee on Wednesday, but any decision is dependent upon information from the Highways Agency about the impact of the development on the Broadway, A627M and Elk Mill area. If it does not arrive in time, the matter will have to be deferred until the next meeting, on November 14. Linda Brooks, spokeswoman for the Residents’ Together group, which is fighting the plans, said: “We are disappointed that the planning department has recommended approval for both schemes. “We have had a couple of meetings with Oldham Athletic and they have reduced the overall density (of housing) by 10 per cent. “But football is not the major issue — it is everything else that goes with it. “One major problem is traffic management. No new access is proposed and we want to know if the Highways Agency has concerns about traffic overall or just the Elk Mill and A627M roundabout areas. “Also, the height of the north stand will be only slightly lower than the floodlights and much longer. “We will be turning up on Wednesday night to make sure the plans are deferred." The committee will consider two sets of plans: a full, detailed application for the demolition and rebuilding of the north stand facing Broadway; and outline plans for the south and west stands, including a hotel, fitness club, shops, cafés, 533 flats, 140 houses, and parking for 981 cars. The ground’s capacity would increase to 16,000 from 13,500. There have been 591 letters objecting to the outline plans, but 26 in support of the scheme plus backing from the Chamber of Commerce and a 2,000 name petition. Planners say the current stadium and surrounding area are under-used, adding: “The site’s location on a main access to the town from the motorway network makes it ideal to project a positive image of both the club and the borough, with a landmark structure.” The proposed north stand would have 5,200 seats, conference/banqueting facilities, club accommodation and office space, accessed from Hilbre Avenue. The plans are opposed by 468 people, but also supported by 26 letters and the petition. The report says it is a high quality development that would ensure professional sport remains viable while at the same time providing a positive face to a major gateway into the borough, thereby assisting in attracting new business.” Better parking for up to 1,250 cars, similar to the existing provision, is welcomed. There is a clear need for the new stand, it says. And while the need for the offices is not as clear, it says they are essential to the economic benefits of redeveloping the Boundary Park stadium. The chairman of the planning committee, Councillor Steven Bashforth, said: “We will be in close contact with residents, Oldham Athletic and the Highways Agency in order to keep everyone informed. “If we have to defer them we will be writing to all affected residents to let them know the new date.” " Edited October 15, 2007 by Diego_Sideburns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khlatics4ever Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 Remember that Bashforth acted before the elections. I had contact with another Councillor before the elections on this and other matters and he was very upfront and forthcoming. Then the elections.....then all quiet. Once elected they revert to their true colours. And there is another matter that I cannot print here where he has done "something" else. The club are aware. Lets hope that the decsion to redevelop is given otherwise it may get very dirty. It will be very interesting to know which way Councillor Bashworth conducts himself on this issue but on the occations I have been in discussions with him about the Boundary Park redevelopments he has implied negativity on a minority of issues, ie predominatly highway related topics & as such I think if your innuendoes are substantial then i think you should publish them or I think you should retract them with an appology. C.O.Y.B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 The plans are opposed by 468 people, but also supported by 26 letters and the petition. And yet again...the Chron fails to state how many are in the area/have been canvassed that haven't sent a letter or shown support one way or the other. Meaning, they probably have no objections. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardy Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 I have had a think about going to the meeting, if you do go down, why not wear your colours as then it shows the amount of support the club has for the scheme! Is anybody else going to make the trip to the civic. I have this info regarding the meeting... It will be held in either the Crompton Suite or the main Council Chamber but entrance to both is behind the Queen Elizabeth Hall under the canopy. Parking on the main QE Hall car park is best but it is pay and display. We need as many people as possible to get down there and support the application. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 16, 2007 Author Share Posted October 16, 2007 Is anybody else going to make the trip to the civic. Mrs. Sideburns and I are going. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.