There's been no planning permission application yet, so there's no CPO's in place. The Mason sisters delayed the Centenary stand for a decade, so you're counting your chickens....at this point Note that there's been 80% of the 1700 in favour of the idea, which leaves 340 who are patently against it. It only takes a handful for create a planning log jam - just ask Bill Kenwright......
Tobes, go back and read the Area Plan and the comments made when it was published. The Council made a commitment to employ their CP powers should ANY of the householders fail to reach a negotiated settlement. Your maths are a little out there. The fact that 340 have not voted FOR the plan does not mean that they are "patently against it."
Making a 'commitment' means nothing in reality. A planning application hasn't gone in yet, so talking about CPO's as being 'in the bag' as such, is way previous. There wasn't a vote, it was people expressing their opinions on the idea, if 80% were for it, then it's not rocket science to calculate that the other 20% weren't Or do you think that people would make submissions on a planning idea to express their ambivalence? In any case, you were merely being pedantic, as my point was, it only takes a handful of committed objectors to slow planning applications to a snails pace or even de-rail them all together. There's a long way to go with this scheme & it's bound to hit obstacles along the path, as they invariably do.
Tobes, go back to counting your beans! You obviously have little experience of managing and interpreting research data. It's not just LFC/FSG who have an interest in the Area project. The Council does have the power to make CP decisions. So this time there is a far greater likelihood of a successful outcome.
As I said earlier it's always the last few that can present the biggest problem. However our beloved council now have a lot of experience of kicking people out of their homes via CPOs (see the Welsh Streets and Edge Lane being decimated by the bulldozers). The residents fought the council as far as they could but in the end they still got booted out of their houses. It will happen IMO but it's still (potentially) some way off yet.
Oh do shut up, you pompous old know nothing I was merely saying (completely correctly) that there's a long way to go before you can consider it the fait accompli, that you were making out it was. The council backing the scheme also doesn't guarantee success - as I eluded to earlier - just ask Bill Kenwright.
I doubt any CPO's objections would ultimately succeed in that awful area, as your 20 years work in creating an absolute ****hole in those streets has been a massive success. They could easily slow the process down though, if someone was of a mind to.
**** OFF Tobes - hand ****e out and get it back. If you wish to peddle your inexact biased opinion then expect them to be challenged.
Have another read of it love (& anyone else who reads this btw) & then please point out exactly where I've handed out any "****e" in the points I was making. Thanks in advance. Oh & while you're there, also point out what you were supposedly correctly challenging. Cheers.
Absolutely pathetic! Firstly it wasn't me who started name calling - it was you. Secondly, at least I can actually comprehend that just because somebody does not register a positive response that their opinion is necessarily negative. So go away and actually think about the crap you're posting
What? so you consider " go back to counting your beans! You obviously have little experience of managing and interpreting research data" a perfectly acceptable response to my posts then? Seriously? For the record I didn't even throw any insults at you in my response to that, as you are old, you're definitely pompous & you continually prove that you know **** all about anything........so I was merely being factual
Pathetic, you're not even worth arguing with. Your arguments are specious and your rationale questionable. As for being a bean counter - you provided that information quite a while ago when you presented your tin-pot qualifications! Don't bother replying as I certainly won't be responding.
I wasn't 'arguing' with you Dave, you however try to turn every discussion into an argument. With anyone who doesn't share your vacuous opinion on whatever subject is being discussed. As when your point is picked to pieces, you resort to name calling or your pathetic attempts to portray yourself as being some form of intellectual superior, which is laughable, given your obvious lack of noodle. As for my profession, I've never once said I was a 'bean counter', nor have I ever mentioned any form of accountancy qualification, so yet again you're completely wrong. As for your last line, lol - "I want the last word, so kindly shut up with your factual nonsense"
please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image never happening, any of these!!!
Exactly Bluff. Despite planning approval for both projects being granted & supported by the local councils involved......
