Golf ‘pods’ for Hayling Island course set for refusal

[smeagal]

Typical HBC sell out
Wonder how many council members belong to the Golf Club?
So no environmental studies and no consultation well that is to be expected.
Time for a change of council members Oh I forgot it is totally Tory.
After looking at the News Photos It reminds me of the Caravan which was parked next to the tea hut before the owner died and the council designated it an eyesore.
These look what they are trailers from a mobile caravan site!!!.

[quash]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Typical HBC sell out
Wonder how many council members belong to the Golf Club?

What are you suggesting ?

[snowflake]

he is suggesting what a lot of people are thinking.

[smeagal]

Originally Posted by quash

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Typical HBC sell out
Wonder how many council members belong to the Golf Club?

What are you suggesting ?

What is the word ? collusion or old friends network I find it incredible that the sailing club apply to extend their storage yard and it was thrown out but HGC want to put mobile homes on the beach and get the green light with No Public Consultation.
If it smells bad it is probably rotten.
This is of course my OPO Is this a pod???

[AndyLenaghan]

Originally Posted by snowflake

he is suggesting what a lot of people are thinking.

As far as I know I am the only one who is a member of the golf club and do not sit on the planning committee.

I personally wasn't overly keen on the colour or the units but thought a development was appropriate on the site and as Leah said approved with conditions to be approved by officers. It is a development on a previous developed site so refusing any development is unreasonable as currently it is an eyesore.

The application was advertised in the normal way and all rules complied with which did produced objections, so to say no public consultation is ridiculous. I am sure if people accessed the planning pages of HBC they will see all the reports there.

[smeagal]

Originally Posted by AndyLenaghan

As far as I know I am the only one who is a member of the golf club and do not sit on the planning committee.

I personally wasn't overly keen on the colour or the units but thought a development was appropriate on the site and as Leah said approved with conditions to be approved by officers. It is a development on a previous developed site so refusing any development is unreasonable as currently it is an eyesore.

The application was advertised in the normal way and all rules complied with which did produced objections, so to say no public consultation is ridiculous. I am sure if people accessed the planning pages of HBC they will see all the reports there.

Are the minutes of said meeting open to public scrutiny?
Because I send in an objection in writing and wish to know whether it was discussed or ignored.

[Farfromit]

Originally Posted by smeagal

Are the minutes of said meeting open to public scrutiny?
Because I send in an objection in writing and wish to know whether it was discussed or ignored.

As the site was previously developed and now looks like a derelict scrapyard and given the unreasonableness of your comments and the implications contained in some of your posts I dare say it was, if not ignored, discounted.

[AndyLenaghan]

Originally Posted by smeagal

Are the minutes of said meeting open to public scrutiny?
Because I send in an objection in writing and wish to know whether it was discussed or ignored.

The whole file including letters of objection and support are viewed by the Committee. Representations can also be made in person at the meeting.

[Leonardo]

Originally Posted by snowflake

he is suggesting what a lot of people are thinking.

And, I suspect, what many many more are not.

[smeagal]

Originally Posted by Farfromit

As the site was previously developed and now looks like a derelict scrapyard and given the unreasonableness of your comments and the implications contained in some of your posts I dare say it was, if not ignored, discounted.

I do hope so as it was supported by the HWT and if it was then it will have to be referred to the government inspector.
The responsibility to return the site to it's previous good order is the EMU as part of the agreement when it was allowed to use it for survey purposes.
As for being unreasonable I refute that totally . HGC have to obey the rules just like every other resident of this island.
This derelict site adjoins a SSSI which has world protected grasses and lizards and they have not obeyed the rules by having a survey before a planning application was made.
Then take into account the disruption to traffic whilst the reinstatement and building goes on and considering that there is a public beach adjacent to the proposed development are they going to restrict access?
All these questions require answers .