Matt Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 clayton fields pt 2. its not theirs to sell! You couldn't make it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Serious answer... I dont know... but I get your point... You reckon its as low as 80 ? It is going to be a lot higher... Traffic will be a big concern for a whole host of people as well... and I reckon you will have a few united and city who will more than happy stick the boot in... I aint defending them, or even saying I agree... You just ignore them at your peril... If it becomes an election issue we have a problem... I understand the answer to the serious question is the nearest houses (approx 17) are about half a mile away, which is not close enough to qualify for formal planning consultation. The Traffic assessment will have to be carried out, as before, based on how many cars people can drive at the same time. If it becomes an election issue, and candidates opposed to the proposal are elected in Failsworth, they will be outvoted by the other councillors in whichever political group is in control. I cannot see any political group opposing the principle of this type of development in that area of the Borough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Well for those who went to the forum SC said that BA were in serious talks with a group re the land at the lancaster club, and this other group wanted to put industrial units on there. So I can see this going one of two ways, it gets approved, and a community stadium along with community facilities get built. OR It doesnt, latics drop even lower, the land owned by BA is sold, industrial units are built of somesort, failsworth and oldham is left with -1 green area -1 cricket pitch -3 football pitches Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 clayton fields pt 2. its not theirs to sell! The Advertiser has reported previously: Cllr Mohib Uddin, cabinet member for regeneration, said the council believes the additional land of 11.75 acres – which it is proposed will be leased to Oldham Athletic – does not form part of Lower Memorial Park. "When the council checked the status of this land with the Charities Commission they advised that the identified development site was ‘not held upon specific charitable trusts’ and they would therefore ‘not need to be involved or advise on its disposal’. "Furthermore, upon checking the deeds within the proposed stadium site, officers have advised that the land does not hold any legal connection to those who died in the First World War. "However, it is also possible – if the development eventually receives detailed planning permission – that Oldham Athletic might be asked to make a contribution to the improvement of the formal Lower Memorial Park area which is, of course, to be retained." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 clayton fields pt 2. its not theirs to sell! Which means the Dynamos are fooked because they planned to build on there too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Isn't a "negative ground swell" a crater? Does that mean what I think it means? It means he's talking out of his arse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 (edited) I understand the answer to the serious question is the nearest houses (approx 17) are about half a mile away, which is not close enough to qualify for formal planning consultation. Yet 80 people turned up last night pissed off.... It is not wise to ignore people with issues... The Traffic assessment will have to be carried out, as before, based on how many cars people can drive at the same time. If it becomes an election issue, and candidates opposed to the proposal are elected in Failsworth, they will be outvoted by the other councillors in whichever political group is in control. I cannot see any political group opposing the principle of this type of development in that area of the Borough. Oh come on Diego... Like the way Oldham Sports park didn't get opposed... Anyway, ALL I am saying is we ignore people at our peril... I am pissed off how little people are gauging our thoughts as fans... Goodness knows how badly the local residents of failsworth feel... Edited October 14, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 I've got three words ... typical f*cking nimbys. The thing is-the nimbys usually win. Or at least they do in Oldham. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 I would imagine at that stage the 80 would be much higher... Generally speaking if 80 people are prepared to gate crash a meeting you tend to find a greater level of annoyance behind them... It's only ever relatively small groups of people who involve themselves in campaigns anyway. It doesn't mean they don't have broad support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Does anyone have a clue which bit of the land the club proposes to build the stadium on? Is it going to be built on the current patch owned by BA or is it going to be built on the council owned bit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 The thing is-the nimbys usually win. Or at least they do in Oldham. Which is a sad indictment of the town as a whole. Listening to valid concerns is one thing, letting the NIMBY's beat down any development plan is another altogether. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Does anyone have a clue which bit of the land the stadium is going to be built on? Is it going to be built on the current patch owned by BA or is it going to be built on the council owned bit? My guess is which ever part of the site the dynamos play on.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Which is a sad indictment of the town as a whole. Listening to valid concerns is one thing, letting the NIMBY's beat down any development plan is another altogether. I think we can all agree on this one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Anyway, ALL I am saying is we ignore people at our peril... People make representations against development but effectively get ignored all the time in the planning process. The Council has to do what's best for the Borough as a whole, based on its Development Plan and planning guidance from the Government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 People make representations against development but effectively get ignored all the time in the planning process. The Council has to do what's best for the Borough as a whole, based on its Development Plan and planning guidance from the Government. If only it did.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Does anyone have a clue which bit of the land the club proposes to build the stadium on? Is it going to be built on the current patch owned by BA or is it going to be built on the council owned bit? If I've understood what's been said so far, and in the absence of plans which have not yet been prepared, the stadium would be built on BA land, with the allotments and other Council land needed to provide satisfactory access to the site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Senor Coco is right about this. It's predictible, NIMBYism. And without the plans which are in the process of production it's impossible to assess the impact on the local area. On about 25 days of the year ( or parts of 25 days) there will be extra traffic. That's probably all that can be quantified. Hardly the world being turned upside down. It's not as though it's an area of Outstanding Natural Beauty that's going to be despoiled. I wonder if any of our own anti-Failsworth OWTB members will get involved with whatever local opposition there is....? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 It doesn't matter a toss if it was paid for by public subscription. Rochdale Town Hall was, so were loads of public libraries and monuments and so on, the councils still own them and can dispose of them as they please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Senor Coco is right about this. It's predictible, NIMBYism. And without the plans which are in the process of production it's impossible to assess the impact on the local area. On about 25 days of the year ( or parts of 25 days) there will be extra traffic. That's probably all that can be quantified. Hardly the world being turned upside down. It's not as though it's an area of Outstanding Natural Beauty that's going to be despoiled. I wonder if any of our own anti-Failsworth OWTB members will get involved with whatever local opposition there is....? Also, I can't imagine a latics game to attract any more traffic than when there is a game on at eastlands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 (edited) Also, I can't imagine a latics game to attract any more traffic than when there is a game on at eastlands. Considering the road layout around there, the residents are barking up the wrong tree... I also disagree with their concerns about fan trouble...I am sure police figures can show we have little issue with this... I also do not see how a £20 million development would effect their house prices in a negative manner... Maybe if someone took the time to speak to them... Edited October 14, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Maybe if someone took the time to speak to them... I've got the snooker balls, you bring the socks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 I've got the snooker balls, you bring the socks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 I've got the snooker balls, you bring the socks. Is there a greenhouse amongst the allotments? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticMark Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Considering the road layout around there, the residents are barking up the wrong tree... I also disagree with their concerns about fan trouble...I am sure police figures can show we have little issue with this... I also do not see how a £20 million development would effect their house prices in a negative manner... Maybe if someone took the time to speak to them... I've posted the following on the Chron website: "Latics have already had an open forum that certain individuals decided not to attend. Traffic links in Failsworth are better than at Boundary Park, so 23 home matches a year will not be a problem. There is no evidence that house prices will fall, and they may even increase as a result of regeneration. Latics are also a family club with a history of well behaved fans. Do these 80 people represent the whole of Failsworth, and why should they halt a much needed multi-million regeneration project?" Don't let the NIMBYs win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 (edited) I've posted the following on the Chron website: "Latics have already had an open forum that certain individuals decided not to attend. Traffic links in Failsworth are better than at Boundary Park, so 23 home matches a year will not be a problem. There is no evidence that house prices will fall, and they may even increase as a result of regeneration. Latics are also a family club with a history of well behaved fans. Do these 80 people represent the whole of Failsworth, and why should they halt a much needed multi-million regeneration project?" Don't let the NIMBYs win. Its not just 23 matches a year... The development will result in increased traffic during all hours... The rest is fair to say ... Edited October 14, 2009 by oafc0000 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.