astottie Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 (edited) It will be very interesting to see what stance it takes having had 24 hours to think about it. I expected it to take no side yesterday which is exactly what it did but if there is no editorial comment today then it will be ducking the issue. It doesn't have good relations with the club and hasn't got a good word to say about the council. It is also very fond of giving front page publicity to protest groups or individuals who think that they have been wronged (Monday this week is an example) usually without checking the story or trying to give the alternative view or right to reply. Whilst they won't want to upset the good burghers of the residents group I think they might be loathe to upset Latic's fans as well. Part of the role of a local paper must be to campaign on local issues and nail it's colours to somebody's mast. Tonight will be a test for the paper as I feel it really has to go one way or the other. The Saddleworth wind farm was easy as their was only one local point of view really (apart from me) , so that was easy for them to oppose. Tonight is different. Will they go for the residents or the fans of the club and it's obvious positive knock on effect for the whole town? It's decsion time for them. As my dad use to say you can't 2 horses with one arse but i think they might give it a good try. Andy Edited November 16, 2007 by astottie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 They know about the march, i imagine it will be published in some way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astottie Posted November 16, 2007 Author Share Posted November 16, 2007 They know about the march, i imagine it will be published in some way But will they suppport it that is the issue. Reporting is not enough now, they have to nail their colours somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 But will they suppport it that is the issue. Reporting is not enough now, they have to nail their colours somewhere. To a fence would be my prediction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 This is how the Advertiser reported on the outcome of the meeting: Latics plans in chaos Mike Keegan 15/11/2007 OLDHAM Athletic chiefs said they were "gutted" after plans to redevelop the club's Boundary Park stadium were given the red card. Owners of the League One club had drawn up an ambitious £80m regeneration scheme, including three new stands with hospitality facilities and also proposals for 700 new homes in the surrounding area. But at a packed Oldham civic centre last night, councillors decided not to grant planning permission for large parts of the project. The refusal is a massive setback for the club's owners, who had pinned their hopes on reviving the Latics' fortunes on the back of revenues from a modern stadium complex. Residents living close to the ground voiced their opposition to the proposals and claimed the planned towering apartment blocks would be an "eyesore" and create "horrendous" traffic problems. Gutted Councillors agreed that their concerns over increased traffic in the area were justified. Latics' co-owner Simon Corney, one of a trio of businessman who bought the club in 2003, said he and his colleagues had spent the last four years putting together the plans for Boundary Park. "We are all gutted and we have no further desire to work with the council. This has been four years in the making and it all ends here." The plans had included proposals for three new stands with bars, hospitality boxes, catering and restaurants. It also featured a landmark business class hotel with 120 beds, conference and banqueting facilities for up to 1,000 guests, a health/fitness centre, 60,000 sq feet of prestigious office space and nearly 700 new homes. Mr Corney added: "This was not just for the football club, we did this with the town of Oldham in mind." Asked if he would now be selling his stake in the club, Mr Corney said: "We will have to wait until the dust settles and see where we are." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 Very positive coverage, WE HAVE THE FRONT PAGE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jac Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 Very positive coverage, WE HAVE THE FRONT PAGE! I like the naming and shaming of councillors as well. I think it's quite a good article that appears to be slightly on our side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 I like the naming and shaming of councillors as well. I think it's quite a good article that appears to be slightly on our side. Should read the editors column, the redeemed themselves to the residents on their... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 Should read the editors column, the redeemed themselves to the residents on their... What does it say ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigfinLatic Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 (edited) Should read the editors column, the redeemed themselves to the residents on their... Do you mean this???? cos for me I read it as 100% behind the club and their need to reapply... (sorry - cant be bothered formatting it...).. for me this is incredibly poistive... saying to the club they are in the right, and they will win the day... however some concession need to be made, which to be honest, i agree with... Half time in Latics’ row WE have listened to the heated words, voicing Oldham Athletic’s bitter disappointment at the refusal of their planning application, now it is time for some cool heads to emerge. The game is not over and lost, it is only half time with the Latics 1-0 down. A cool and considered second half performance, based on a new planning application submitted early next year, could well win the game for the club’s American owners, its fans and for the borough as a whole. Neither the American owners, the Latics fans nor the borough has anything to gain by the club throwing a tantrum and taking the ball home. The redevelopment of the stadium and the land around the stadium is only at stage one of the planning process and Wednesday’s decision, the result of personal opinions rather than political pressure, was a setback not the end of the process. The club now needs to look at its plans again, take on board some of the reservations of the local residents and members of the planning committee and submit new plans which show some concessions. In planning issues as in life, compromise is the best and safest way through the minefield. Investment It is reasonable to assume that, as well as providing the backing for the stadium development, the club owners also want to make a profit out of the development of houses and flats around the ground.They have been pouring up to £40,000 into the club every week since taking over and, because they are not a charity, will, quite rightly, want to see some return on their investment. There is absolutely nothing illegal, immoral or wrong with that. But is there really a need for as many as 639 flats? Do the blocks behind the Rochdale Road End need to be so high? Is there no room for a compromise that will go some way towards meeting the objections? Local residents, too, will have to compromise. It is a fact that if the football club is to survive and prosper, it has to make better use of its assets — in this case land — and that will inevitably have some impact on its neighbours. If the football club goes, all of the land will be developed, almost certainly with a mixture of houses and flats and local residents could well find themselves worse off. It is something to think about, again with cool heads. The development will be good for the club and for its owners, but it will also bring huge benefits to the borough. That is not to say that the club should be allowed to ride roughshod over its neighbours, but it is a consideration for the planning committee to take on board Edited November 16, 2007 by BigfinLatic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 Should read the editors column, the redeemed themselves to the residents on their... Erm not really, it's a well balanced piece. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 (edited) A very fair and balanced report! They have a point about the number of homes! Im just dissapointed no one has shown up the council on the traffic issue! and the way they snubbed a report and put there own expert opinions above it! Edited November 16, 2007 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 Erm not really, it's a well balanced piece. Look who's popped up, you coming tommorow coco? Come say hi. Unfortunatley, i have not had time to read it thoroughly, still busy organizing everything, the quick skim read didnt sound good. Although i accept i could be wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markoasis Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 Front page giving it all the 'we support the Latics' headline then simple showing their true colours hidden inside. Didn't think it was balance at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 (edited) But the editorial mentions nothing about latics making changes to the plans with the council several times before but clearly give the impression Latics have done no such thing and have simply turned up with aplan no one had seen previously. Then go on about the high of the buildings. Front page giving it all the 'we support the Latics' headline then simple showing their true colours hidden inside. Shame om them yet again I think its more posative than negative though. They are just simply point out what needs to change to get this through. Fewer houses! All depends on how mnay houses we need to build to make enough money to get the owners happy. Edited November 16, 2007 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 Should read the editors column, the redeemed themselves to the residents on their... The Editor's column also misses the point, just like the Councillors - it was only an outline application and was going to be the subject of further discussion once approved, when a detailed application is made in the future. In the meantime work could have started by now on the first phase. Delays are costing money! The rarely wrong Chron says let TTA wait until the new year and come back with blocks of flats which are not so high - SC had already reduced some from eight to six storeys and was willing to discuss further as I've said above. He has been working with the Council for four years on the proposals! It may look to the casual reader as though the Editor is reasonable in asking for both sides to compromise, but to compromise to four storeys will give the residents and dissident Councillors exactly what they want, but may also make the scheme non-viable. It all comes back to whether TTA are willing to go ahead on such a reduced scale, or to fight for a reconsideration of the original scheme (as amended). We also have page 5 and the rarely wrong Chron says the Applicant and Council are to be locked in meetings over the weekend to sort out a solution. If you've read my comments on the alledged illegalty of Wednesday's meeting, TTA may still hold the whip hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 Look who's popped up, you coming tommorow coco? Come say hi. Unfortunatley, i have not had time to read it thoroughly, still busy organizing everything, the quick skim read didnt sound good. Although i accept i could be wrong. I'll be at the game but I'm not sure about the march, I like a lie in on weekend morning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 I'll be at the game but I'm not sure about the march, I like a lie in on weekend morning. You better be joking coco..... Get your lazy arse out of bed and support the club!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 I'll be at the game but I'm not sure about the march, I like a lie in on weekend morning. 1.00pm is not morning so we expect to see you there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 What ever way you look at it, the residents concerns are right, I have a big area of clear land infront of my house, if several 6 story flats were built there I would moan like they are, and most people would. The Chron has to represent them too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 (edited) Oops Edited November 16, 2007 by Senor_Coconut Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takemeanywhere Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 What ever way you look at it, the residents concerns are right, I have a big area of clear land infront of my house, if several 6 story flats were built there I would moan like they are, and most people would. The Chron has to represent them too. I suspect that you would moan regardless of what was happening outside your house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 You better be joking coco..... Get your lazy arse out of bed and support the club!!!! I'll see if I can make it, I've got a delivery due between 9 am and 12:30 so it depends on them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspiral_Carpet Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 The Editor's column also misses the point, just like the Councillors - it was only an outline application and was going to be the subject of further discussion once approved, when a detailed application is made in the future. In the meantime work could have started by now on the first phase. Delays are costing money! The rarely wrong Chron says let TTA wait until the new year and come back with blocks of flats which are not so high - SC had already reduced some from eight to six storeys and was willing to discuss further as I've said above. He has been working with the Council for four years on the proposals! It may look to the casual reader as though the Editor is reasonable in asking for both sides to compromise, but to compromise to four storeys will give the residents and dissident Councillors exactly what they want, but may also make the scheme non-viable. It all comes back to whether TTA are willing to go ahead on such a reduced scale, or to fight for a reconsideration of the original scheme (as amended). We also have page 5 and the rarely wrong Chron says the Applicant and Council are to be locked in meetings over the weekend to sort out a solution. If you've read my comments on the alledged illegalty of Wednesday's meeting, TTA may still hold the whip hand. Spot on Diego. The Editor is like a parent talking to a spoiled child. If only the Editor had been there on Wednesday (or listened to its Reporter), then they would know the answers had already been provided and would also know that delaying this until next Year is an unnecessary step after 4 Years worth of planning and consultation. A period of consultation where experts agreed and approved the plans only for a bunch of bungling amateurs to vote against it (possibly illegally in Bashforth's case) based on hearsay; anecdotal evidence and rhetoric. Good that the March got the front page though. We should also get it on Monday too. Any thoughts for Tuesday? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeylandLatic Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 I'll see if I can make it, I've got a delivery due between 9 am and 12:30 so it depends on them. Yes and the march starts at 1pm so you have plenty of time to get there and SUPPORT the club. 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.