|
|
Post by dubchek on Mar 2, 2011 20:21:13 GMT
Been on the planning website 2 objections on March 1st.
I thought there was a cut off date long passed?
Will our case be heard this month BOD?
|
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on Mar 2, 2011 20:58:50 GMT
Dubchek,
I took this up with the planning officer last week and was told that despite the supposed cut-off date, comments are allowed up until the date that the application is approved or rejected.
The objection by Mr Wright is a repeat of his objection of the 15th Feb regarding noise with the addition of his worry about light pollution.
Ms. Wright complains about those and the proximity to the SSI and the effect on wild life.
All these (apart from noise from the PA) are covered in documents submitted by the club, its agents or the relevant authorities.
I will create a response about the PA as I design PA systems.
Finally if anyone wants to add their comments of support, the Poole Borough Planning Dept will still take online submissions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Commercial Director on Mar 2, 2011 22:17:10 GMT
It seems more and more likely that our application will be heard on the afternoon of 17th March.
If you can, get the afternoon off work, your presence and a strong show of support might be crucial.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bay Dolphin on Mar 2, 2011 22:18:04 GMT
So, the two objections are just Mr and Ms Wright are they John? That's one really isn't it!?  If this scheme doesn't get approved I fear the Council Buildings may get stormed! ;D Thanks CD. Wish I could be there on the the 17th March (the Ides of March???)  COYD |
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on Mar 3, 2011 9:32:04 GMT
I will be there CD. As far as I can see all the relevant reports are now in and there is no good reason to delay the hearing of the application.
Sad act that I am, I have been following this in some detail. From memory there have been 4 objections. They are based on increased traffic, light and noise pollution, spoilt views and the effects on wildlife.
All of these bar the noise pollution and spoilt views are covered in either the club's submissions or the reports gathered from the relevant agencies or organisations:
Traffic - There will be far fewer cars at matches than the estimated 1000 cars visiting the Car Boot sale. As the Car Boot sale would end before the stadium comes into use, then the overall effect is a traffic reduction.
Wildlife - Apart from the provision of a track for a certain species of lizard, there is no real impact on animal life and the provision of more trees will improve the area for all wildlife.
Light Polution - New modern floodlights will reduce the light spill considerably as they are more directional.
Noise Pollution - New directional loudspeakers, and careful system design ensure that the sound is heard only within the ground.
Spoilt Views - This objection was from a householder that lives about 500 metres away. It is unlikely to be considered reasonable.
|
|
|
|
Post by sterteroad on Mar 3, 2011 11:49:01 GMT
As I have a bit of spare time on my hands at the moment, I am hoping to be there on the 17th, think it will be in civvies, not with Dylan :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on Mar 3, 2011 11:53:20 GMT
Oh and I forgot to add, If the 17th March is the date the we should all be informed by about the 11th as all who commented have to be notified in writing that the application is being considered,
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisreeves on Mar 3, 2011 14:14:25 GMT
a huge presence of Support in the public seats at the meeting on 17th could be just what tilts the decision our way-it is vital we do all we can and this one of the factors within our control-it could be critical.
|
|
|
|
Post by dubchek on Mar 3, 2011 15:59:24 GMT
Will take a days holiday from work once the date has been confirmed to support our club.
|
|
|
|
Post by expat on Mar 3, 2011 16:13:45 GMT
Will take a days holiday from work once the date has been confirmed to support our club. great example Dubchek....others to follow? ? |
|
|
|
Post by expat on Mar 3, 2011 16:17:38 GMT
So, the two objections are just Mr and Ms Wright are they John? That's one really isn't it!? If this scheme doesn't get approved I fear the Council Buildings may get stormed! ;D Thanks CD. Wish I could be there on the the 17th March (the Ides of March???) : ;D ;D ;D Pensioners storm Municipal buildings...just make sure the toilets are in working order that day!!!!!!!!!!!!! UP THE TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWN!! (wouldn't it be great it we could bring out some of our players from SL days??) COYD |
|
|
|
Post by Commercial Director on Mar 3, 2011 16:26:47 GMT
Sterte - I think Dylan should be present. Talk Sat
|
|
|
|
Post by parky on Mar 3, 2011 16:33:07 GMT
Any idea what time the meeting will begin ?
|
|
|
|
Post by slepe12 on Mar 3, 2011 18:27:46 GMT
Any idea what time the meeting will begin ? Time is critical for me too!! Presumably, it will be held at the Civic centre? |
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on Mar 3, 2011 20:45:59 GMT
Got this from the Council website
Planning Committee
02:00pm - 06:30pm, 17 Mar 11
|
|
|
|
Post by Bay Dolphin on Mar 3, 2011 20:55:49 GMT
Thank you very very much John, slepe, dubchek, parky, sterte, CD, Chris ........ everybody involved and everybody who has helped in any way!!
|
|
|
|
Post by sterteroad on Mar 3, 2011 21:30:41 GMT
Sterte - I think Dylan should be present. Talk Sat Roger that  |
|
towncrier
Dolphin Forum Full Member
Posts: 180
|
Post by towncrier on Mar 16, 2011 9:36:18 GMT
I pitched in a bit at this website about proposal, not sure if it will do any good but it is an active fan based website:http://footballgroundguide.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22071
|
|
|
|
Post by slepe12 on Mar 16, 2011 11:55:21 GMT
I pitched in a bit at this website about proposal, not sure if it will do any good but it is an active fan based website:http://footballgroundguide.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22071 Would have liked to read that TC, but the link didn't work.  |
|
towncrier
Dolphin Forum Full Member
Posts: 180
|
Post by towncrier on Mar 16, 2011 11:59:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on Mar 16, 2011 12:02:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by dave2 on Mar 16, 2011 18:37:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sterteroad on Mar 16, 2011 21:18:03 GMT
Some great comments there |
|
|
|
Post by Bay Dolphin on Mar 17, 2011 11:56:40 GMT
MUST publicly acknowledge the generosity of towncrier's comments in the discussion about small grounds on the footballgroundguide site above.
It doesn't make up for you-know-who refusing us a ground share but that's not your fault either so THANKS TC!
COYD
|
|
|
|
Post by dubchek on Mar 19, 2011 7:12:47 GMT
I see on the planning site a patition of objectors has appeared.
The councils delaying tactics seem clear,it has very little to do with the flood assessment,more likely to give objectors all the time they need.
By the time our planning application is heard expect to see a fully formed Bearwood Action Group.
Well done PBC.
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshDolphin on Mar 19, 2011 9:25:09 GMT
It's interesting to note that the majority of signatories on that petition don't live in Bearwood - I've noticed Christchurch, Wimborne, various areas across Poole and Bournemouth including (ironically) a few not far from Branksome Rec who I can only guess are BRAG members who must just have it in for the club! Also in my opinion (I'm guessing here as I know only 1 is for certain as I know the family) I would suggest that a number of them are school children. Not sure if a child can object to a planning proposal? Perhaps there is one local objector who has taken it upon himself to have all his friends and family (and kids friends too) sign his petition after failing to find much in the way of objection locally? |
|
|
|
Post by dave2 on Mar 19, 2011 10:03:03 GMT
The recent article in the Echo regarding the posponment of the Planning application for the Bearwood site indicated that this was due to not having a Flood Assesment carried out. However the BoP planning site for this application has such a document listed dated January 2011 see link boppa.boroughofpoole.com/online-applications/files/47D02C61AA40B52EF3A1C0228285CA8F/pdf/APP_10_01493_F-FLOOD_RIS K_ASSESSMENT-890981.pdf This report states 'We conclude that the proposed redevelopment of the site in accordance with the above recommendations will result in a neutral impact, or betterment, on existing or future ‘on-site’ and ‘off-site’ flood water levels.' Please can someone explain why it was stated that this had not been done? |
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on Mar 19, 2011 10:38:21 GMT
Dave2. The claim is that they cannot officially "start" the application until all relevant documents are received from the applicant (PTFC or its agents). The PBC planning dept did not ask for a FRA until it was pointed out by the Environment Agency that one was required.
Technically the date of the consultation period began once this document was received (2nd February). So May 4th became the new application Target Determination Date.
|
|
towncrier
Dolphin Forum Full Member
Posts: 180
|
Post by towncrier on Mar 21, 2011 10:44:03 GMT
Thanks Brian for your acknowledgement. As to the turn down of ground share I struggle with the U turn and understanding why offer was withdrawn. Would have been great for me to see good footie at least twice a week half a mile form me house.
Regarding Flood Assessment, isn't Bearwood considerably up hill from the Stour flood plain?
|
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on Mar 21, 2011 10:57:45 GMT
Yes TC Bearwood's risk of Flooding is very very small but it has to be done if the site is over 1 Hectare (10,000 Sq Metres).
|
|
