Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

Search results

  1. C

    The Decision - YES, but first prove there's nowhere else available

    My GOD, are you still banging on about f***ing PENDE? Give it up man.
  2. C

    The Decision - YES, but first prove there's nowhere else available

    Yup.. http://www.northstandchat.biz/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30135
  3. C

    The Decision - YES, but first prove there's nowhere else available

    Ed was a witness at the inquiry and was one of the 'interested parties' who recieved the decision letter this morning.
  4. C

    The Decision - YES, but first prove there's nowhere else available

    Sheepcote Valley is a landfill site. It was filled in 2 years ago. You cannot build on a landfill site for 40 years. That means we can build there in 38? Am i right? Anyway, there are NO sustainable transport links.
  5. C

    The Decision - YES, but first prove there's nowhere else available

    But I'm saying that it's saving us TIME and MONEY by avoiding a judicial review, as Ed says, he is screwing the NIMBYs over, nothing more.
  6. C

    The Decision - YES, but first prove there's nowhere else available

    That is exactly correct. Time to celebrate me thinks.
  7. C

    The Decision - YES, but first prove there's nowhere else available

    THE REASON HE HAS DONE IT THIS WAY IS SO THAT THE NIMBYS CANNOT CHALLENGE THE NEXT DECISION THEREFORE SAVING US TIME AND MONEY. IF HE HAD SAID YES THEN THE NIMBYS COULD HAVE CHALLENGED. BY DOING THIS HE IS RULING OUT A JUDICIAL REVIEW ALTOGETHER.
  8. C

    The Decision - YES, but first prove there's nowhere else available

    So old JP has disagreed with both recommendations for the inspectors?

Top
Link Here