Clever Fox Posted 30 July 2018 Share Posted 30 July 2018 I can't see what the problem is, the Club own the land which for the most part is virgin land aside from the old Club House which is being removed. In the new Development the only difference is the Buildings. The rest will still just be virgin land with a few markings on it. Be it Pitch Markings or Golf Markings. The integrity of the landscape is being maintained and i assume the Buildings will be far enough from the Road not to be too visible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxondale Posted 30 July 2018 Share Posted 30 July 2018 I'm all for closing down golf courses. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcfc278 Posted 30 July 2018 Share Posted 30 July 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, wattolcfc said: We need names and addresses so Top can go round and rough them up like Putin did to hooligans prior to the World Cup! That’ll get it built! If ever there was a perfect opportunity to get Wasilewski back, short term contract from Top, send him in to the village and they'll all soon shut up. Edited 30 July 2018 by lcfc278 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dynamark Posted 30 July 2018 Share Posted 30 July 2018 Saxon wash your mouth out please.If they went for this on a piece if farmland it defintley would not happen.The previous leisure use is the entire reason they may well get the approval..It could be argued the golf enhances the landscape and this seriously alters it This is a major development and involve a lot of earthmoving .Its a hilly site at present serious building construction and remodelling of the landscape.The site though is well screened and visual impact will be minimal..It should go through Id be amazed if it doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 3 more documents added. Including a formal objection from Radcliffe on the Wreake Parish Council, and two letters from a 5 1/2 and 2 1/2 year olds whose grasp of the English language is superior to most posters on this forum. Not suspicious in the slightest that ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spudulike Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said: 3 more documents added. Including a formal objection from Radcliffe on the Wreake Parish Council, and two letters from a 5 1/2 and 2 1/2 year olds whose grasp of the English language is superior to most posters on this forum. Not suspicious in the slightest that ? What are RotWPC formally objecting to ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 4 minutes ago, Spudulike said: What are RotWPC formally objecting to ?? https://pap.charnwood.gov.uk/AnitePublicDocs/00994789.pdf Quote Dear sir, Please find below a formal objection to this planning application based on road safety concerns. Councillors reviewed the planning application and agreed that whilst they had no objection with the actual development they did have major concerns about the access to the site and the road safety aspect of the application, particularly the total inadequacy of the A46 Seagrave/Thrussington junction. It was noted that LCFC have during the course of the various public consultation events maintained that the development will not create any more traffic than the golf club. This is clearly not the case and the proposals include an increase in the provision of car parking spaces by 301 and the provision of 8 coaches. If there was to be no increase in traffic this provision would not be necessary. The site is within a countryside location and is not well serviced by public transport, so the reality is that all visitors and workers will have to rely on the use of private vehicles. There are no footpaths or cycle ways up to the entrance to the proposed development so it is unlikely to be accessed by pedestrians or cyclists. The A46 Seagrave/Thrussington junction has been acknowledged to be a very unsafe junction and when the Park Hill Golf Club was originally proposed in 1991, the Department of Transport recommended refusal of the club until a flyover had been constructed. The volume and speed of traffic has increased significantly since that time and it is felt that until such a time as the junction has been improved by the provision of a flyover or roundabout that no development should be permitted. The plans for the access road for the site show the entrance encroaching onto common land that is obviously not in the ownership of the applicant and will result in the destruction of some established bushes and an objection would be submitted to the re siting of the access over common land the resulting in the destruction of greenery which currently screens the site. It was noted that following a review of the report from Highways England it was deemed that they are not fulling their duty to ensure that highway users are safe and that Charnwood Borough Council and Leicestershire County Council would make this case. Regards, 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spudulike Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 6 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said: https://pap.charnwood.gov.uk/AnitePublicDocs/00994789.pdf I can't believe they are encroaching onto Common Land. That will be an issue needing consent from the Secretary of State. I'm sure they know that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 11 minutes ago, Spudulike said: I can't believe they are encroaching onto Common Land. That will be an issue needing consent from the Secretary of State. I'm sure they know that It's OK, our current Secretary of State is literally non-human: Quote He is the first MP in modern times to win a horse race, having raced to victory at the Newmarket July Course in August 2012. Get Vaz on the phone, I'm sure he can get hold of some Ketamine. Keith/Jim then uses his influence to change the rules. Job done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxFossil Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 Traffic/dangerous Junction is the only legitimate planning issue Ive seen in the extracts. This is simply a way for a cash strapped council to get someone else to pay for improvements which, if the junction is genuinely dangerous, they have a statutory duty to fix. Bet is they make it a condition of giving planning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mehrez Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 What does a roundabout cost these days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purpleronnie Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 1 hour ago, Mehrez said: What does a roundabout cost these days? roundabout £6000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 1 hour ago, Mehrez said: What does a roundabout cost these days? 2016 The cost of building Sheppey’s desperately needed roundabout on the A2500 Lower Road to relieve the Island’s gridlocked traffic jams has rocketed by £200,000 in TWO WEEKS. The scheme now stands at £1.8million. The news was broken to shocked councillors at the Joint Transportation Board meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mehrez Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 10 minutes ago, davieG said: 2016 The cost of building Sheppey’s desperately needed roundabout on the A2500 Lower Road to relieve the Island’s gridlocked traffic jams has rocketed by £200,000 in TWO WEEKS. The scheme now stands at £1.8million. The news was broken to shocked councillors at the Joint Transportation Board meeting. Two Benaloune’s then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted 2 August 2018 Share Posted 2 August 2018 I’m sure the council will be reminded of all those big charitable donations that the owners have made over the years to the Leicester hospitals & Foxes Foundation etc.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian_marshall Posted 3 August 2018 Share Posted 3 August 2018 5 hours ago, Albert said: I’m sure the council will be reminded of all those big charitable donations that the owners have made over the years to the Leicester hospitals & Foxes Foundation etc.... Would have thought that if anything that would create tension and resentment seeing as they are different Council's. The only way this might be useful is if it sits alongside an off the record conversation identifying what the Council's plans are for the future and if they require a little charitable support to realise those plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mehrez Posted 9 August 2018 Share Posted 9 August 2018 Some new documents up looks like they’ve started responding to highways etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wymsey Posted 9 August 2018 Share Posted 9 August 2018 Have seen quite a few Highway vehicles both parked in front of the entrance yesterday morning and heading towards the A46 from the village. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post urban.spaceman Posted 9 August 2018 Popular Post Share Posted 9 August 2018 18 minutes ago, Wymeswold fox said: Have seen quite a few Highway vehicles both parked in front of the entrance yesterday morning and heading towards the A46 from the village. I saw that. I had to drive past about 50 times to try and see what they were doing. Turns out they were collecting data on the number of cars on the road. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WigstonWanderer Posted 10 August 2018 Share Posted 10 August 2018 On 02/08/2018 at 23:00, urban.spaceman said: 3 more documents added. Including a formal objection from Radcliffe on the Wreake Parish Council, and two letters from a 5 1/2 and 2 1/2 year olds whose grasp of the English language is superior to most posters on this forum. Not suspicious in the slightest that ? TBF that isn’t all that hard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 15 August 2018 Share Posted 15 August 2018 (edited) New documents up. The same person who said we're a small club and shouldn't aspire to anything is still unhappy. Deloitte also submitted a huge document too. Edit: just realised it’s also the same person who claimed the fences were “concentration camp” style. Edited 15 August 2018 by urban.spaceman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniFox21 Posted 15 August 2018 Share Posted 15 August 2018 8 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said: New documents up. The same person who said we're a small club and shouldn't aspire to anything is still unhappy. Deloitte also submitted a huge document too. What are they all kicking up about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanSP Posted 15 August 2018 Share Posted 15 August 2018 what have Deloitte said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 15 August 2018 Share Posted 15 August 2018 6 minutes ago, UniFox21 said: What are they all kicking up about? The sewage plan. Load of old shit if you ask me. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chapero82 Posted 15 August 2018 Share Posted 15 August 2018 On 02/08/2018 at 17:36, urban.spaceman said: https://pap.charnwood.gov.uk/AnitePublicDocs/00994789.pdf Do they think it’s a whole new stadium or something? It’s just the clubs training ground not 32000 attending each week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts