Stadium Redevelopment Update from Council site

[oafc-benn]

I apologise in advance if this has been mentioned before but it appears Oldham Council have added the details of responses received from neighbours to the club regarding the proposed development of BP.

 

Have to say doesnt look like the local people around BP want any development at all.

Hopefully the council will take into consideration the views of the fans etc.

 

 

 

North Stand (NSM) (to become the new Main Stand)

http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/planning/aco...Systemkey=37142

Total Number of Neighbours Consulted: 410

Summary of Responses:

Responses Received: 230

In Favour: 3

Against: 227

Petitions: 0

 

 

South & West Stands (Chaddy and Main Stand), Hotel & Housing

http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/planning/aco...Systemkey=37143

Total Number of Neighbours Consulted: 464

Summary of Responses:

Responses Received: 347

In Favour: 11

Against: 336

Petitions: 0

[Butter]

I apologise in advance if this has been mentioned before but it appears Oldham Council have added the details of responses received from neighbours to the club regarding the proposed development of BP.

 

Have to say doesnt look like the local people around BP want any development at all.

Hopefully the council will take into consideration the views of the fans etc.

North Stand (NSM) (to become the new Main Stand)

http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/planning/aco...Systemkey=37142

Total Number of Neighbours Consulted: 410

Summary of Responses:

Responses Received: 230

In Favour: 3

Against: 227

Petitions: 0

South & West Stands (Chaddy and Main Stand), Hotel & Housing

http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/planning/aco...Systemkey=37143

Total Number of Neighbours Consulted: 464

Summary of Responses:

Responses Received: 347

In Favour: 11

Against: 336

Petitions: 0

 

When do the council ever listen to what local residents think though?

The woods near me is being built on despite having about 500 people against the development.

I hope residents are ignored in this case!

[cheshireblue]

If I am reading that right 227 out of 230 people are against the New Start Mortgages Stand being redeveloped - unbelievable. The stand is nowhere near any housing, how can they complain about one stand being knocked down and another built in its place. It seems that particular application doesn't contain any housing plans so not sure on what grounds they they can reasonably object.

 

My local rugby club Warrington, had planning permission and a new ground built in around 2 years yet every proposal for Latics brings a whole series of objections. When did we first start talking of a new ground or redevelopment, must have been 10 years ago at least. Come on Oldham Council lets see some action instead of talking. We can't let a handfull of people keep blocking every proposal put forward. Every other club seems to be able to get new stands built without much fuss (except Brighton !)

 

If this gets turned down you can only see TTA thinking whats the point.

[Diego_Sideburns]

The position regarding the number of consultees against the planning applications was reported after the consultation period ended in May. I reported again in July when the subject was raised again.

 

The Planning Committee is to consider the applications either in August or September, and the Officer's recommendation will be published on the Council's Planning web site five working days before the meeting. I'll keep my eye on it and report on here when it is made public.

 

 

(Greganator @ Jul 19 2007, 14:13 PM)

NOT being negative but don't think they would even consider a petition submitted now as consultation period closed ages ago. Believe the objectors would have a case IF OMBC accepted it as part of the planning consideration at this stage.

 

Personally I believe EVERY latics fan should write a letter to their respective local councillors and to members of the planning commitee voicing the frustration at the situation. Believe this would carry more weight at this stage. ONLY a suggestion.

 

Diego_Sideburns Jul 19 2007, 15:24 PM Post #5

I'm afraid it's a case of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. Despite repeated efforts by me and others to increase the size of the on line petition with the signatures of Latics' fans and Oldhamers, there was very little enthusiasm expressed at the time.

 

I reported on here on May 12 2007, 20:52 PM Post #26

The consultation period on the two planning applications has now ended. The representations (including mine) submitted to the Council were:

 

Detailed application for new main stand to replace NSM (Lookers) stand: For: 2 Against: 225

 

Outline application for remainder of development proposals: For: 6 Against: 330.

 

Keep everything crossed!

 

 

I think most people used to be indecisive about submitting letters in support of the planning applications, but now they can't be sure!

[Diego_Sideburns]

If this gets turned down you can only see TTA thinking whats the point.

 

Exactly! That's why it was so important for fans to write to the Council in support of the applications, but only a total of 14 went to the trouble.

 

There was also the petition which was circulated at BP (which I never saw), but the number of people who signed the petition on line was nothing to shout about, especially when it was padded out with the signatures of fans of other clubs, particularly Brighton and Wrexham.

[Diego_Sideburns]

Just spotted the appointment of this guy to the board of the Oldham Rochdale Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder. Could this bring the kind of expertise needed to ensure that developments of the type proposed for a state-of-the-art mixed-use facility at BP, that the whole Borough can be proud of, are approved and implemented for the benefit of the Borough?

 

http://www.24dash.com/news/1/25448/index.htm

[The Blue Real]

I spoke to some one at the club on Wednesday about the Clayton Arms to see if i could hire the big room out

next year and was told that it may be being re opened in about 6 weeks for the next 2 years.

 

He did say that the club has only got planning permission for one stand but not say which stand!!!

[Diego_Sideburns]

I spoke to some one at the club on Wednesday about the Clayton Arms to see if i could hire the big room out

next year and was told that it may be being re opened in about 6 weeks for the next 2 years.

 

He did say that the club has only got planning permission for one stand but not say which stand!!!

 

The Club has only applied for detailed planning permission for one stand - the North Stand (NSM) (to become the new Main Stand). The other application is only for outline permission for the South & West Stands (Chaddy and Main Stand), Hotel & Housing.

 

So the Clayton Arms will be able to reopen when the licensing formalities are approved and then continue operating until the second phase of the redevelopment takes place.

 

Your spokesman would have said "applied for" rather than "got" planning permission, because the applications haven't been considered by the Planning Committee yet. We don't want to give the impression that it's all cut and dried before the meeting takes place, as that would give the objectors a legitimate gripe about the democratic process.

 

Let's be patient and wait for the planning wheels to move forward slowly but surely and then join TTA for a drink in the Clayton Arms.

[Guest sheridans_world]

I dont think the club can reopen the Clayton Arms, i believe there was a clause in the contract when it was purchased that a licence cannot be held for the premises. JW Lees protecting their business for the greyhound....

[Diego_Sideburns]

I dont think the club can reopen the Clayton Arms, i believe there was a clause in the contract when it was purchased that a licence cannot be held for the premises. JW Lees protecting their business for the greyhound....

 

As they say in 24hoursfromtulsehill's workplace - I refer my right honourable friend to the last post of mine under a previous thread.

 

http://www.owtb.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=...amp;#entry41897

[Guest oa_exile]

Exactly! That's why it was so important for fans to write to the Council in support of the applications, but only a total of 14 went to the trouble.

 

There was also the petition which was circulated at BP (which I never saw), but the number of people who signed the petition on line was nothing to shout about, especially when it was padded out with the signatures of fans of other clubs, particularly Brighton and Wrexham.

 

Response from Alan Hardy :

 

Andy

 

The two petitions were handed over to our planning consultant in June for him to pass on to OMBC.

 

We had 2,661 from the online and 2,374 from the one at the ground which you helped with so thanks for doing such a grand job.

 

We expect the application to go before the planning committee either this month or next.

 

Alan

[Guest sheridans_world]

As they say in 24hoursfromtulsehill's workplace - I refer my right honourable friend to the last post of mine under a previous thread.

 

http://www.owtb.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=...amp;#entry41897

 

Would like to point out, that statement means nothing.

 

The clause is there.

 

Fact.

 

 

Edit: We havent even bought it yet, the sale hasnt gone through as yet.

Edited August 3, 2007 by sheridans_world

[Diego_Sideburns]

Would like to point out, that statement means nothing.

 

The clause is there.

 

Fact.

Edit: We havent even bought it yet, the sale hasnt gone through as yet.

 

When it reopens you can buy me a pint in there!

 

If it doesn't reopen I'll buy you one at an away match!

 

Deal?

[Forte_Baby]

Typical Oldham council there not interested in sport within our community at Oldham. Latics proberly generates more interest in this town than anything else our council continues to invest the money in worthless projects.

[Guest sheridans_world]

When it reopens you can buy me a pint in there!

 

If it doesn't reopen I'll buy you one at an away match!

 

Deal?

 

And if it isnt demolished for another 10 years?

 

Gotta set a time limit on these things

 

 

Edit: OK this season, if it isnt open by Crewe Alexandra, you buy me a pint before the Crewe game

Edited August 3, 2007 by sheridans_world

[Diego_Sideburns]

And if it isnt demolished for another 10 years?

 

Gotta set a time limit on these things

 

Blimey O'Riley I thought you were sure of your FACT that it will remain closed to protect Lees' interest in the Greyhound.

 

OK let's say :

 

1. If the Clayton Arms (or the same pub under a new name) [hereinafter referred to as " TTA pub"] reopens before the Greyhound:

falls down; or

is struck by lightning; or

is involved in a plane or helicopter crash; or

is demolished; or

closed permanently for whatever reason;

 

or before JW Lees goes out of business with all its premises being transferred to a new owner;

 

then you will buy me a pint in TTA pub.

 

2. If TTA pub does not reopen, not never, not nowhow, in the circumstances described in 1 above, then I'll buy you a pint at an away match.

 

3. If TTA have laft and OAFC has gone out of business, I'll buy you the pint described in 2 above at some mutually convenient hostelry, provided that it is not run by JW Lees.

 

Can't say fairer than that!

 

Deal? I'll give you time to run it past your legal advisors.

Edited August 3, 2007 by Diego_Sideburns

[Guest sheridans_world]

Blimey O'Riley ....... legal advisors.

 

 

Ok lets make it English and a lot easier to understand.

 

 

 

1. If the Clayton Arms doesnt re-open before the 26th April, you buy me a pint at Crewe Away.

 

2. If the Clayton Arms does re-open before the 26th April, i buy you a pint in there vs. Cheltenham.

 

The clause will then carry on into next season.

 

Thus a pint at stake every season as to whether the Clayton Arms reopens or not in accordance with the above two statements.

 

 

Hows that?

Edited August 3, 2007 by sheridans_world

[Diego_Sideburns]

Ok lets make it English and a lot easier to understand.

1. If the Clayton Arms doesnt re-open before the 26th April, you buy me a pint at Crewe Away.

 

2. If the Clayton Arms does re-open before the 26th April, i buy you a pint in there vs. Cheltenham.

 

The clause will then carry on into next season.

 

Thus a pint at stake every season as to whether the Clayton Arms reopens or not in accordance with the above two statements.

Hows that?

 

Subject to the following slight amendment to clause 2 (in case I can't make it to the pub on 26th April):

 

2. If the Clayton Arms does re-open before the 26th April, i buy you a pint in there vs. Cheltenham or prior to another more convenient match.

 

If that's OK we have a

[Guest sheridans_world]

Slight amendment to clause 1.

 

1. If the Clayton Arms is demolished or Doesnt re-open as a public house before the 26th April, you buy me a pint at Crewe away or any subsequent away match where both of us are present.

 

 

 

 

Note: We are hopefully using the changing rooms for the OWTB Vs. OASIS match, this does not constitute 'opening'.

 

[Diego_Sideburns]

Slight amendment to clause 1.

 

1. If the Clayton Arms is demolished or Doesnt re-open as a public house before the 26th April, you buy me a pint at Crewe away or any subsequent away match where both of us are present.

Note: We are hopefully using the changing rooms for the OWTB Vs. OASIS match, this does not constitute 'opening'.

 

 

We don't need the words "is demolished or", because it could re-open as a public house before 26th April and be demolished before that date.

 

So clause 1 to read:

 

1. If the Clayton Arms does not re-open as a public house before the 26th April, you buy me a pint at Crewe away or any subsequent away match where both of us are present.

 

OK?

[Guest sheridans_world]

S_W Contract

 

1. If the Clayton Arms does not re-open as a public house before the 26th April, you buy me a pint at Crewe away or any subsequent away match where both of us are present.

 

2. If the Clayton Arms does re-open before the 26th April, i buy you a pint in there vs. Cheltenham or prior to another more convenient match.

 

 

D_S Contract

 

1. If the Clayton Arms does not re-open as a public house before the 26th April, I buy you a pint at Crewe away or any subsequent away match where both of us are present.

 

2. If the Clayton Arms does re-open before the 26th April, you buy me a pint in there vs. Cheltenham or prior to another more convenient match.

 

 

 

 

 

*Cyber Shake of Hands*

Edited August 3, 2007 by sheridans_world

[Diego_Sideburns]

S_W Contract

 

1. If the Clayton Arms does not re-open as a public house before the 26th April, you buy me a pint at Crewe away or any subsequent away match where both of us are present.

 

2. If the Clayton Arms does re-open before the 26th April, i buy you a pint in there vs. Cheltenham or prior to another more convenient match.

D_S Contract

 

1. If the Clayton Arms does not re-open as a public house before the 26th April, I buy you a pint at Crewe away or any subsequent away match where both of us are present.

 

2. If the Clayton Arms does re-open before the 26th April, you buy me a pint in there vs. Cheltenham or prior to another more convenient match.

*Cyber Shake of Hands*

 

 

We have a deal.

 

So that's a pint off newyorkboss and a pint off sheridans_world. Nice one!

[Diego_Sideburns]

I apologise in advance if this has been mentioned before but it appears Oldham Council have added the details of responses received from neighbours to the club regarding the proposed development of BP.

 

Have to say doesnt look like the local people around BP want any development at all.

Hopefully the council will take into consideration the views of the fans etc.

North Stand (NSM) (to become the new Main Stand)

http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/planning/aco...Systemkey=37142

Total Number of Neighbours Consulted: 410

Summary of Responses:

Responses Received: 230

In Favour: 3

Against: 227

Petitions: 0

South & West Stands (Chaddy and Main Stand), Hotel & Housing

http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/planning/aco...Systemkey=37143

Total Number of Neighbours Consulted: 464

Summary of Responses:

Responses Received: 347

In Favour: 11

Against: 336

Petitions: 0

 

I know we looked at this issue last week but this photo from 1991 is interesting. Since it was taken the land in the bottom half of the picture has been redeveloped from athletics track/football pitches and open space into a B & Q Superstore, the Clayton Green Pub, the Premier Travel Inn, a car showroom and a used car display area. All this without mass objections from the local residents as fas as I remember.

 

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1173/103234...98ad38901_b.jpg

[marhar]

I know we looked at this issue last week but this photo from 1991 is interesting. Since it was taken the land in the bottom half of the picture has been redeveloped from athletics track/football pitches and open space into a B & Q Superstore, the Clayton Green Pub, the Premier Travel Inn, a car showroom and a used car display area. All this without mass objections from the local residents as fas as I remember.

 

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1173/103234...98ad38901_b.jpg

 

very interesting, especially re b&q probably the biggest ugliest and closest to houses

 

since then the rochdale road end was re-done, was there much opposition from local residents about the redevelopment there?

[Diego_Sideburns]

since then the rochdale road end was re-done, was there much opposition from local residents about the redevelopment there?

 

Not so far as I am aware.