sussexblue
Stephane Pounewatchy
Posts: 170
Likes: 229
|
Post by sussexblue on Apr 25, 2024 15:07:05 GMT
Xxxk me we’re all planning consultants now, just maybe the piataks have employed professional consultants to look at the best possible viable sights for the training complex which ticks the relevant boxes for the cash they want to spend and just maybe , guess what the sheep mount was the best option, I’m no expert but I guess this is what they done , the way some people are going on you’d think someone had said to Tom piatak I no a big chunk of grass nest the town center and Tom said that will do then
|
|
|
Post by carwash on Apr 25, 2024 15:34:15 GMT
Sussex, I'm not convinced the Piataks have employed planning consultants. I get the impression their approach has been to talk to the council planners and council leaders about their plans without lodging official applications which would be in the public domain. They will have been equipped with professionally drawn up plans.
By the way I love the discussion about retrospective planning permission. It's also common in conservation areas where people haven't realised changing the colour of a front door or replacing wooden fascias on a garage with upvc etc might need planning permission. Another type of pp with retrospectivity is the Certificate of Lawful Development where someone has exercised their legal development rights like building a small extension then getting the certificate afterwards just to prove it.
I do think a decent training ground will be an asset to the club.
|
|
|
Post by mullen103 on Apr 25, 2024 15:36:15 GMT
Sussex, I'm not convinced the Piataks have employed planning consultants. I get the impression their approach has been to talk to the council planners and council leaders about their plans without lodging official applications which would be in the public domain. They will have been equipped with professionally drawn up plans. By the way I love the discussion about retrospective planning permission. It's also common in conservation areas where people haven't realised changing the colour of a front door or replacing wooden fascias on a garage with upvc etc might need planning permission. Another type of pp with retrospectivity is the Certificate of Lawful Development where someone has exercised their legal development rights like building a small extension then getting the certificate afterwards just to prove it. I do think a decent training ground will be an asset to the club. Do you think the Sheepmount is a good idea?
|
|
sussexblue
Stephane Pounewatchy
Posts: 170
Likes: 229
|
Post by sussexblue on Apr 25, 2024 15:42:25 GMT
Sussex, I'm not convinced the Piataks have employed planning consultants. I get the impression their approach has been to talk to the council planners and council leaders about their plans without lodging official applications which would be in the public domain. They will have been equipped with professionally drawn up plans. By the way I love the discussion about retrospective planning permission. It's also common in conservation areas where people haven't realised changing the colour of a front door or replacing wooden fascias on a garage with upvc etc might need planning permission. Another type of pp with retrospectivity is the Certificate of Lawful Development where someone has exercised their legal development rights like building a small extension then getting the certificate afterwards just to prove it. I do think a decent training ground will be an asset to the club. Do you think the Sheepmount is a good idea? im not saying they’d have employed planning consultants, I’m saying they’d have employed consultants to do feasibility studies on possible available sights and part of thus study the consultants would have looked into the planning side of things , I’m sure for whatever reason be it budget or location the sheepmount was most favorable, in other words leave it to the experts
|
|
|
Post by heyheyalanshoulderl on Apr 25, 2024 15:48:01 GMT
I think most people's assumption of retrospective planning permission differs. Bifter obviously has knowledge in this area, and he has given his explanation of how it works from scratch. Most cases that I'm aware of already have the permissions in place to build, it's when people do things outside of what has been agreed that they need retrospective permission. Two different things entirely. Captain Tom's daughter should probably have perused the guidance on retrospective planning before using charity donations to build a swimming pool at there home. Which they then had to demolish. What a shame eh Nobody likes a thieving bitch
|
|
|
Post by happyblue on Apr 25, 2024 16:12:03 GMT
Captain Tom's daughter should probably have perused the guidance on retrospective planning before using charity donations to build a swimming pool at there home. Which they then had to demolish. What a shame eh Nobody likes a thieving bitch No one likes a bitch who uses an elderly veteran to make money , tainting a legacy of a true British hero .
|
|
|
Post by northernsoul on Apr 25, 2024 19:07:49 GMT
Do you think the Sheepmount is a good idea? im not saying they’d have employed planning consultants, I’m saying they’d have employed consultants to do feasibility studies on possible available sights and part of thus study the consultants would have looked into the planning side of things , I’m sure for whatever reason be it budget or location the sheepmount was most favorable, in other words leave it to the experts And if theyd done that under an open and honest policy they would have named the sites theyd ruled out and why Before they plumped for their first choice Blackpool named all the sites theyd looked at and why theyd discarded them something the Yanks should have done here. My guess is they went for the Sheepmount because it was a lease deal with no upfront purchase cost Its pretty clear now that they thought they were talking a 50+ year lease but the council have something more around the 10 years in mind without them having to make any investment in the site for the likes of flood works and fencing etc.
|
|
|
Post by northernsoul on Apr 25, 2024 19:24:51 GMT
Sussex, I'm not convinced the Piataks have employed planning consultants. I get the impression their approach has been to talk to the council planners and council leaders about their plans without lodging official applications which would be in the public domain. They will have been equipped with professionally drawn up plans. By the way I love the discussion about retrospective planning permission. It's also common in conservation areas where people haven't realised changing the colour of a front door or replacing wooden fascias on a garage with upvc etc might need planning permission. Another type of pp with retrospectivity is the Certificate of Lawful Development where someone has exercised their legal development rights like building a small extension then getting the certificate afterwards just to prove it. I do think a decent training ground will be an asset to the club. I dont think anybody is arguing against that i certainaly arent But we only get one shot at this so lets get it right and not go for some half arsed scheme on a site with a short lease that floods just because theres no purchase cost and its in the city centre. If they really arent going to build Poolfoot anymore then they should go and look at the temporary facility building that Blackpool leased when they started the whole training ground development thing and maybe go for that somewhere creating a couple of pitches and a hard standing for the dome all of which would be temporary and come off the back of a lorry and wouldn't need full planning permission. i really hope they havnt been using any consultants because if they have they've been well and truly shafted. But one thing that is for certain is that there definitely are no planning applications regarding a training facility but what worries me is that Piatak senior keeps referring to Carlisle council i think somebody needs to tell him theres no longer any such thing Maybe that explains why hes not getting the responses hes looking for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2024 19:59:19 GMT
Sussex, I'm not convinced the Piataks have employed planning consultants. I get the impression their approach has been to talk to the council planners and council leaders about their plans without lodging official applications which would be in the public domain. They will have been equipped with professionally drawn up plans. By the way I love the discussion about retrospective planning permission. It's also common in conservation areas where people haven't realised changing the colour of a front door or replacing wooden fascias on a garage with upvc etc might need planning permission. Another type of pp with retrospectivity is the Certificate of Lawful Development where someone has exercised their legal development rights like building a small extension then getting the certificate afterwards just to prove it. I do think a decent training ground will be an asset to the club. I dont think anybody is arguing against that i certainaly arent But we only get one shot at this so lets get it right and not go for some half arsed scheme on a site with a short lease that floods just because theres no purchase cost and its in the city centre. If they really arent going to build Poolfoot anymore then they should go and look at the temporary facility building that Blackpool leased when they started the whole training ground development thing and maybe go for that somewhere creating a couple of pitches and a hard standing for the dome all of which would be temporary and come off the back of a lorry and wouldn't need full planning permission. i really hope they havnt been using any consultants because if they have they've been well and truly shafted. But one thing that is for certain is that there definitely are no planning applications regarding a training facility but what worries me is that Piatak senior keeps referring to Carlisle council i think somebody needs to tell him theres no longer any such thing Maybe that explains why hes not getting the responses hes looking for.
The Piataks want to build a training ground in the city but northernsoul wants us to move to Blackpool!
|
|
|
Post by northernsoul on Apr 25, 2024 20:37:41 GMT
I dont think anybody is arguing against that i certainaly arent But we only get one shot at this so lets get it right and not go for some half arsed scheme on a site with a short lease that floods just because theres no purchase cost and its in the city centre. If they really arent going to build Poolfoot anymore then they should go and look at the temporary facility building that Blackpool leased when they started the whole training ground development thing and maybe go for that somewhere creating a couple of pitches and a hard standing for the dome all of which would be temporary and come off the back of a lorry and wouldn't need full planning permission. i really hope they havnt been using any consultants because if they have they've been well and truly shafted. But one thing that is for certain is that there definitely are no planning applications regarding a training facility but what worries me is that Piatak senior keeps referring to Carlisle council i think somebody needs to tell him theres no longer any such thing Maybe that explains why hes not getting the responses hes looking for.
The Piataks want to build a training ground in the city but northernsoul wants us to move to Blackpool!
Hey carry on son youre already on the list not be long now before your joining Keith Mallard and the rest.
|
|
|
Post by carwash on Apr 26, 2024 14:47:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mullen103 on Apr 26, 2024 15:10:47 GMT
I’m sure a few weeks back we were told an announcement would be soon - looks like we are a while from any agreement. As I’ve said before I’m doing some work for the council and there’s huge huge backlogs in every department. However there’s nothing stopping the club using any of the public pitches in the meantime - sucking the leaves up first obviously.
|
|
|
Post by blues86 on Apr 26, 2024 15:20:27 GMT
The response I got from the council, in summary, was they are taking so long because they need to understand what the club wants and then decide if that is in the best interests of the whole community. Total joke considering the raised part the club are wanting to takeover has two old pitches, a knackered astro turf and changing rooms from the 1930s.
|
|
|
Post by carwash on Apr 26, 2024 15:29:39 GMT
I’m sure a few weeks back we were told an announcement would be soon - looks like we are a while from any agreement. As I’ve said before I’m doing some work for the council and there’s huge huge backlogs in every department. However there’s nothing stopping the club using any of the public pitches in the meantime - sucking the leaves up first obviously. Richard you asked earlier if I was in favour of the Sheepmount site. Honestly I am not the right person to ask. I defer to others' opinions on which site is the most suitable. I have obviously had much more UK planning experience than the Piataks. I would advise them to sort out early on what the contentious points are likely to be and look for ways of softening the impact, addressing concerns etc. If there's no major planning policy problem but for some reason the planners don't like the proposals then I'd suggest whacking the application in and stressing that if the planners aren't happy they'll appeal to the government inspector. I've never lost an appeal yet. The issue holding everything up is probably more about acquiring suitable tenure over the land, i.e. a long enough lease, option to buy etc. The Piataks need to have identified which committees make the relevant decisions and start working on the committee members to 'sell' their vision. Sadly there's not much that can be done if the Council drags its feet over whether or not it wants to release public land.
|
|
|
Post by mullen103 on Apr 26, 2024 19:42:02 GMT
Is the Gun club still in use at the top?
|
|