Harry Dowds Green Shirt Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Yeah but that is due process... This stuff happens all the time.. Why is not acceptable ? The club went through the same process everyone goes through... The club deserve no special right to be awarded planning permission on a massive development... Annoying maybe, frustrating defiantly.... Unacceptable ? Not even nearly... Did the council actual break any rules? Looking forward to it As I said in an earlier post, the club had the right to appeal to the secretary of state on the grounds of non determination after 13 weeks. They chose not to on the basis that it would have taken coinsiderably longer to get a decision by going down that route than allowing due process with the application. Councils know this and IMO abuse the system. They constantly delay registering applications, claiming lack of information has been submitted which delays the time scale commencing and in the meantime they can proceed with various aspects of the process. It is common and an abuse of the due process you refer to. I therefore have little sympathy when they get criticesed about timescales. And that is from someone who worked in Local Authorities for 13 years spending several of those years dealing with the legal side of planning appeals. Cheers, Harry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Who knows. Politics and democracy is not always a good thing. Sausage AND Bacon are though - 'specially with egg, black pudding, mushrooms and beans. and much like me and leeslover... very bad for your health Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 As I said in an earlier post, the club had the right to appeal to the secretary of state on the grounds of non determination after 13 weeks. They chose not to on the basis that it would have taken coinsiderably longer to get a decision by going down that route than allowing due process with the application. Councils know this and IMO abuse the system. They constantly delay registering applications, claiming lack of information has been submitted which delays the time scale commencing and in the meantime they can proceed with various aspects of the process. It is common and an abuse of the due process you refer to. I therefore have little sympathy when they get criticesed about timescales. And that is from someone who worked in Local Authorities for 13 years spending several of those years dealing with the legal side of planning appeals. In your opinion it was abused... At least you acknowledge all this is due process... It happens with more than latics... Its democracy end of that day for all its good and bad points... People think we was hard done by, look at the fights some other clubs have had... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 You know, ever since oafc0000 adopted his new avatar I keep (momentarily) thinking that leeslover is responsible for his posts. So do I. To add, I thought BANGERS! wasn't such an undignified slang word for a pair of breasts... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 I don't think so... I think the traffic report is just a advice the councillors can ignore if they choose to.. ? The request for a second report was in the rules wasnt it? Are people really suggesting the council acted outside of the rules? Its quite a big claim that is not being back up I think... Could they done it in 13 weeks ? Probably... Was that realistic ? No... I posted this yesterday to give an indication of how Councillors should deal with planning applications.. http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/resea.../snsc-00931.pdf There were several breaches of the rules governing Councillors' behaviour, which I wrote about to the Council's Leader and Chief Executive at the time, and they were very embarrassed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 which I wrote about to the Council's Leader and Chief Executive at the time, and they were very embarrassed. Did they respond ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Dowds Green Shirt Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 In your opinion it was abused... At least you acknowledge all this is due process... It happens with more than latics... Its democracy end of that day for all its good and bad points... People think we was hard done by, look at the fights some other clubs have had... Hang on just a minute. First of all other clubs have had challenges getting their planning consents for varying reasons. None of them, as far as I am aware had any similarities to the case at BP. The 1st part of the application was for a new North (Lookers) stand. Whilst it was considerably bigger than the existing structure (not that it exists any more) it was well within acceptable design tolerances and as such was the easier part of the redevelopment proposals to approve and that is why it was approved at the November planning meeting whilst the housing aspect was refused. Secondly, the principle of housing on the site had previously been established when the council granted outline consent for housing for the whole of the BP site during the Sports Park 2000 process and the only issues that were therefore up for debate were 1) scaling and massing with the proposal including 4 to 8 storey apratment blocks, 2) density, was the scheme possibly overdevelopment and 3) traffic impact, which was covered by the survey report submitted with the application and which the architects had previously agreed the basis of during the pre submission meetings and which they chose to subsequently disbelieve and insist on further unnecessary surveys. In essence, the only real issue was the traffic and the Council chose not to believe a survey that they had a significant part in commissioning, so I do believe that they unnecessarily and unreasonably delayed the process. Having sat on both sides of the planning process, I believe I am qualified to make that call. Cheers, Harry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 In your opinion it was abused... At least you acknowledge all this is due process... It happens with more than latics... Its democracy end of that day for all its good and bad points... People think we was hard done by, look at the fights some other clubs have had... A bit short term there - how many new stadiums did we have planned pre-TTA? Sports park 2000 was only a plan after the Bovis manoeuvring. Over 19 years since we first tried to sort out a new stadium? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 I believe I am qualified to make that call. You might be... It is still only an opinion until you make a complaint and it is upheld / take legal action though... Neither has happened I understand... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 A bit short term there - how many new stadiums did we have planned pre-TTA? Sports park 2000 was only a plan after the Bovis manoeuvring. Over 19 years since we first tried to sort out a new stadium? Sorry mate, what you on about ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Did they respond ? They did and I reported their replies on here at the time. That's how I know they weere embarrassed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Dowds Green Shirt Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 You might be... It is still only an opinion until you make a complaint and it is upheld / take legal action though... Neither has happened I understand... Sometimes you have to be bigger than throwing the toys out of the pram. You have to see/think of the bigger picture, work hard in the background build bridges and remember that you might need to go through the process again, do your homework and look to ensure that next time it proceeds more smoothly. Oh hang on. Cheers, Harry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Sausage AND Bacon are though - 'specially with egg, black pudding, mushrooms and beans. i had a black pudding in a tapas bar in barcelona last friday night..bloody yumshire it was too.. it was just missing some mustard though..but washed down with a cold estrella, t'was wonderful! anyway..as you were Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Sorry mate, what you on about ? Pretty simple, you said "People think we was hard done by, look at the fights some other clubs have had..." I think that given we had been trying to get a new ground / development of the site since the late 80s (that's why Bovis were the sponsor) I thought that comprisons to other clubs "struggles" as being harder/worse/whatever were a bit misguided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Sometimes you have to be bigger than throwing the toys out of the pram. You have to see/think of the bigger picture, work hard in the background build bridges and remember that you might need to go through the process again, do your homework and look to ensure that next time it proceeds more smoothly. Advice which I had to accept reluctantly at the time in the long-term interest of the club, and stop kicking the Council while it was down procedurally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Pretty simple, you said "People think we was hard done by, look at the fights some other clubs have had..." I think that given we had been trying to get a new ground / development of the site since the late 80s (that's why Bovis were the sponsor) I thought that comprisons to other clubs "struggles" as being harder/worse/whatever were a bit misguided. I am a bit young to be honest to comment on anything which happened like that in the 80's... I only know from Sports Park onwards... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 i had a black pudding in a tapas bar in barcelona last friday night..bloody yumshire it was too.. it was just missing some mustard though..but washed down with a cold estrella, t'was wonderful! Sure it wasn't a bullock's bollock, Johnny? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Advice which I had to accept reluctantly at the time in the long-term interest of the club, and stop kicking the Council while it was down procedurally. Sometimes you have to be bigger than throwing the toys out of the pram. You have to see/think of the bigger picture, work hard in the background build bridges and remember that you might need to go through the process again, do your homework and look to ensure that next time it proceeds more smoothly. Like I said, its all opinions and hearsay until you get your arguments upheld... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Like I said, its all opinions and hearsay until you get your arguments upheld... There ae none so blind as those who will not see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Sure it wasn't a bullock's bollock, Johnny? it very well could have been! no,they(catalunya) have a version of a bury lancashire pudding, with some slight differences. 1/ its always shallow fried, whole. 2/the texture is more looser than firm. 3/it has onions in it. the taste is pretty much the same though. maybe bury's finest enjoy healthy wedges of bullocks dangles also? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 There ae none so blind as those who will not see. Says the mute man who wont put his accusations to the test.... I am sure the councillors would have there own side to the story... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Dowds Green Shirt Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Says the mute man who wont put his accusations to the test.... I am sure the councillors would have there own side to the story... I think you missed Diego's point. I believe he was referring to the point I made in post 262. Cheers, Harry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 I think you missed Diego's point. I believe he was referring to the point I made in post 262. If you choose the path of 262 I think to then attack the council is done so on weak ground... Its due process unless you prove otherwise... and when I say prove I mean make a complaint, let both sides get heard and then win that complaint... I am not qualified to make a call on it... I will not accept the council up if no one is prepared to take them to account over it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Becketts Anchor Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 So do I. To add, I thought BANGERS! wasn't such an undignified slang word for a pair of breasts... I was thinking it was a double banger.... As far as the council went, the Chair refused to believe the traffic figures, and asked for another survey. After a short recess (and no doubt a telling off from the legal people) he announced that another traffic survey wasn't possible, and that the figures quoted were 'what they were'. And he led it to be rejected anyway, on grounds of not believing the traffic survey. IMO that was clearly an illegal breach of his power, not to mention a slap in the face for the Council's traffic officer. The survey figures were explained to him before the second meeting, when he accepted the figures and the application was passed. I'm not sure this delay would have made a lot of difference to the way things turned out though. Something that struck me at the first meeting was the way that the club representative (SC) seemingly thought that all he had to do was turn up. He spoke for his 3 minutes like a kid that hadn't researched his school project, and was unable to answer questions convincingly. Ian Hill spoke at the second meeting, professionally and confidently. Let's hope that whichever plan goes forward, it's done properly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 I am sure the councillors would have there own side to the story... I assume this is the part where they dont say they were trying to get their own asses elected again... 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.