Guest sheridans_world Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I had a brief flick through the application files that have now been uploaded onto the Planning pages (http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/planning/acolnetcgi.gov and search for boundary park, 053016/07 is the North Stand plan). It's about 900 pages long!!! But it has stuff in there extracted from Oldham Councils own planning guidance stuff and there is a chunk about how permission will be granted for leisure/sports centre stuff, even if there is local and environmental opposition. See here - http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/AcolnetDocs/...les/51588_1.pdf and go to p.101 onwards. Makes quite good reading actually. Also gets good around 376, move on to around 400 and there is pretty little pictures! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted April 30, 2007 Author Share Posted April 30, 2007 Also gets good around 376, move on to around 400 and there is pretty little pictures! As i said, key word is 'regeneration' ply that card and we should be ok, If the development doesn't go ahead, will the last person to leave the town please turn out the lights........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 As i said, key word is 'regeneration' ply that card and we should be ok, If the development doesn't go ahead, will the last person to leave the town please turn out the lights........ Spot on. Couple of good things in those plans. Nice drawings of the houses and apartments too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Ha, just realised the Chron took the word Mosque out of my list of things that could be built on the BP land. Jokers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Oh and I've heard about this Covenant on the carpark before, I believe it's rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Do I recall correctly that they were polling 130 residents in their survey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 That or 230, a lot more than what they reckon. Also why have there only been a handfull of objections? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 That or 230, a lot more than what they reckon. Also why have there only been a handfull of objections? I'm interested in the number of replies they would have to have got to get figures of both 98 and 99%. Seems to me someone has been a little slack with the numbers, but the Chron has reported it as fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 It was 131 who were asked with 130 attending the meeting. I believe 98% replied with 99% of those against the plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 It was 131 who were asked with 130 attending the meeting. I believe 98% replied with 99% of those against the plans. The replies were in and counted before the meeting though? I don't think 98% responded, that never happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 (edited) The replies were in and counted before the meeting though? I don't think 98% responded, that never happens. Yes. I think they quoted this before the meeting it may have even been in The Advertiser last week. *Edit* Found it... Roy Bradbury, spokesman for Residents Together, claims a recent survey by the group which was returned by 131 residents found 98.5 per cent were against the development plans. The Advertiser story I mean it isn't gospel, not at all but it is what they keep repeating. Edited April 30, 2007 by RoytonBlueLad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubblehead Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 if that happens these supposedly all powerful residents will suddenly have to fight off Barratt Homes building a ten story block with Belfour Beaty sticking a 4 lane road thru to reduce conjestion on the roadabout at the retail park. If these people want to try and compete with politcal power of those companies then good luck to them, but I'll certainly be loving it when they lose out! They'll have lost out not only on the club and the facilites it provides but also on the chance to have a REAL say in what happens and not just a moan about it. Wise words Ackey. If we dont develop on it, someone else will. We all know what local councils are like for agreeing to stick Houses and flats etc on any spare bit of land. I'd much rather have our development near my house anyday. At least you will know who your neightbours will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 They don't have to bow to the objections though, the planning commitee that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts