AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 That seems quite a high number to me, wouldn't you usually be looking at about 5 from the neighbours? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 Voted in favour. I’ll never step foot back in there again and if the end result is more jobs and money to better the local economy which ironically Ashley has failed to do with his investment in NUFC, who am I to object over views or extra seats raising the capacity of what is no more than a huge SD store. It’s clear only a small minority care, but it’s even more clear the majority don’t, fans, people, planners, the city, the lot. If they did, it wouldn’t even be an issue. I’d rather challenge plans that went against proper social, economic and environmental causes than some daft stadium plastered with SD signs 53,000 people shop at every other week. Fuck them, fuck that. Jobs, use of land for more beneficial purposes, money into the economy, development etc. I vote for that! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 Voted in favour. I’ll never step foot back in there again and if the end result is more jobs and money to better the local economy which ironically Ashley has failed to do with his investment in NUFC, who am I to object over views or extra seats raising the capacity of what is no more than a huge SD store. It’s clear only a small minority care, but it’s even more clear the majority don’t, fans, people, planners, the city, the lot. If they did, it wouldn’t even be an issue. I’d rather challenge plans that went against proper social, economic and environmental causes than some daft stadium plastered with SD signs 53,000 people shop at every other week. Fuck them, fuck that. Jobs, use of land for more beneficial purposes, money into the economy, development etc. I vote for that! You do realise that the plans not only prevent an expansion of the stadium, but of any chance of the Metro going to the West End. The same West End that suffers from a poor economy, social problems, connectivity/transport. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson Posted October 17, 2019 Share Posted October 17, 2019 Seems like a petulant swipe to claim some kind of high ground, nice one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderson Posted October 17, 2019 Share Posted October 17, 2019 Assumed that was just another HTT shitpost that had a caught a couple wooshes before reading it. Man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted October 17, 2019 Share Posted October 17, 2019 Voted in favour. I’ll never step foot back in there again and if the end result is more jobs and money to better the local economy which ironically Ashley has failed to do with his investment in NUFC, who am I to object over views or extra seats raising the capacity of what is no more than a huge SD store. It’s clear only a small minority care, but it’s even more clear the majority don’t, fans, people, planners, the city, the lot. If they did, it wouldn’t even be an issue. I’d rather challenge plans that went against proper social, economic and environmental causes than some daft stadium plastered with SD signs 53,000 people shop at every other week. Fuck them, fuck that. Jobs, use of land for more beneficial purposes, money into the economy, development etc. I vote for that! You do realise that the plans not only prevent an expansion of the stadium, but of any chance of the Metro going to the West End. The same West End that suffers from a poor economy, social problems, connectivity/transport. The West End doesn’t need the Metro in to Toon, far from it, it would be massively underused given every 5 minutes a bus will get you into the town within 10 minutes across various routes or you could walk it in ten minutes... The West End is economically and socially more well off than any other out of city centre populace and more well connected in terms of transport structure too. Of course things could be better and improvements are needed, but having no Metro or the capacity of SJP capped to current levels for ever does not and never will be a negative effect to the WE of the City. The issues effecting the WE are affordable housing, green space, school standards and SMEs on the local high street having to pay silly business rates sometimes 3 times the rate of rent fees. Socially drugs and crime is common practice but no more so than the goings on inside the bogs of Pop World down the Bigg Market or the bogs at half-time at SJP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted October 17, 2019 Share Posted October 17, 2019 By the way my good friend drives the 39/40 and during the week they are regularly 20% or below capacity and over the last 5 years have seen a markedly drop in numbers using the buses. Whether that’s because more people have cars now or because people stay more local to shop who knows, but I guarantee the WE does not need the Metro running through it, if anything it needs better transport to and from the Metro Centre directly, which of course could have a negative effect on the city centre. Even then I can walk to the Metro Centre in under 30 minutes, on a par with public transport times and during peak times much quicker than taking the car... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted October 17, 2019 Share Posted October 17, 2019 https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/english-footballs-best-grounds-pint-20636002.amp?__twitter_impression=true 3.5 times more than 2nd! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBG Posted October 17, 2019 Share Posted October 17, 2019 More importantly we've got Eldon Square nearby to keep the missus busy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LV Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Chi is mint. Really fortunate to have her. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toon No9 Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Chi is mint. Really fortunate to have her. Would be mint to have Chi as owner of NUFC! ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoot Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 That's brilliant. Anyone with any knowledge of these things, what's the chances of this development being cancelled due to public objections? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 That's brilliant. Anyone with any knowledge of these things, what's the chances of this development being cancelled due to public objections? Planning applications can’t be rejected due to the number of public objections. There has to a legal reason to object. At the moment the view blocking of SJP is the closest we will get. If Nexus got their fingers out of the arse and tried to create some sort of plans for an extension of the Metro, then the prevention of the Metro expansion could be used. If the council got their fingers out and said that an expanded SJP (via the Gallowgate stand) was part of their master plan for the area/city then that would help. Right now it’s important that people objecting use the only real legal reason to object, currently that’s the buildings blocking the view of SJP. Only when objections in numbers are about relevant and legitimate reasons to object are they taken into consideration, or should be by law. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest covmag Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 That's brilliant. Anyone with any knowledge of these things, what's the chances of this development being cancelled due to public objections? Planning applications can’t be rejected due to the number of public objections. There has to a legal reason to object. At the moment the view blocking of SJP is the closest we will get. If Nexus got their fingers out of the arse and tried to create some sort of plans for an extension of the Metro, then the prevention of the Metro expansion could be used. If the council got their fingers out and said that an expanded SJP (via the Gallowgate stand) was part of their master plan for the area/city then that would help. Right now it’s important that people objecting use the only real legal reason to object, currently that’s the buildings blocking the view of SJP. Only when objections in numbers are about relevant and legitimate reasons to object are they taken into consideration, or should be by law. Is that a fact? Why let you object, what’s the point of that then, surely if the whole street launch objection to my extension it’s gonna have an effect at planning stage in some form? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 Aye but have you got a few grand to throw at the rest of your street to tell them to shut the fuck up and play ball? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 That's brilliant. Anyone with any knowledge of these things, what's the chances of this development being cancelled due to public objections? Planning applications can’t be rejected due to the number of public objections. There has to a legal reason to object. At the moment the view blocking of SJP is the closest we will get. If Nexus got their fingers out of the arse and tried to create some sort of plans for an extension of the Metro, then the prevention of the Metro expansion could be used. If the council got their fingers out and said that an expanded SJP (via the Gallowgate stand) was part of their master plan for the area/city then that would help. Right now it’s important that people objecting use the only real legal reason to object, currently that’s the buildings blocking the view of SJP. Only when objections in numbers are about relevant and legitimate reasons to object are they taken into consideration, or should be by law. Is that a fact? Why let you object, what’s the point of that then, surely if the whole street launch objection to my extension it’s gonna have an effect at planning stage in some form? Starts with policy, really. If a scheme aligns perfectly with local and national planning policy, nobody has anything to legitimately complain about in planning terms - even if a thousand people objected. In that scenario, it's very difficult to say no to a scheme, even if it's not the best. This scheme does go against particular policies so I do think there's a chance it'll get thrown out. There's policy re protecting the views of landmarks (including SJP) and there's also generic design policy at national and local level which this arguably flies in the face of. There's an argument that the design is too big for the site (regardless of any impact on SJP), imo, but that's obviously a bit more subjective. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest covmag Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 Fair enough, ones thing for certain, it’s out of our hands. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 In my expert opinion it is genuinely 50/50 despite the development clearly not being in line with policy - and this is because I do not trust the NCC planning department and they have made numerous decision recently against policy. We (NUST) are considering what to do if the scheme is approved and are ready to explore if there are ground for judicial review through the courts if permission is granted contrary to policy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 In my expert opinion it is genuinely 50/50 despite the development clearly not being in line with policy - and this is because I do not trust the NCC planning department and they have made numerous decision recently against policy. Yeap, don't trust the council at all over this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 the word "scheme" is used as a common place in the UK where in the US it sounds shady as fuck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 the word "scheme" is used as a common place in the UK where in the US it sounds shady as fuck. In like Ponzi scheme? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 It can be used like that in the UK too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 Prefer the Scottish usage (and pronunciation). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 Numerous outlets having a pop at the attenders for sitting their quietly. Support the team very quietly whilst paying the regime to not support them it would seem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now