Search results

It hasn't got planning permission yet - all that's happened is a preferred developer has been selected.

I don't think they confirmed either way who would run it. Often with these type of facilities annexed within a separate development, until you get planning permission and the project is 'real', then you won't have a contractual health care provider at pre-planning stage. It may well be that...

The majority of the committee is Labour. I think 2 or possibly 3 of them voted for the application, with 2 conservatives making the committee vote 5-5. Generally a chair will always go with officer recommendation when it comes down to a deciding vote.

Noooooo, I won't have it!!!! True.

I think as many Labour voted for it as against it. 5 votes for, at least 2 were Labour, possibly 3, along with Cllr Theobald and another. Didn't go down party lines at all, although some people seem to want to present it as such.

Of course there is a Plan B. They've piled a huge wedge in fees to get this far, sounded like the design only needs a bit of a tweak to get it approved, and a bit of a compromise on the S106. They only need one more vote to get it over the line.

There were 5 for granting permission, at least 2 of which were Labour, 2 were Tory I think....

I agree. You could see that as a positive result that 5 councillors are already in support of it. Doesn't sound any real issues with the height, size of the building, they just need to pimp it up a bit. I'd throw some green walls at it personally, maybe a green roof - that would soften all the...

Happens so often it is infuriating.

On the Chairs vote....Julie Cattell, how could you....

Les Hamilton has been a chair of committee in the past, always been a pragmatic person on developments, as he said, design is sometimes subjective, not his cup of tea, but he wouldn't refuse it. Labour always been more pro development than the other parties.

Go on Les!!! Always been solid on committee

MP should have considered a few Green Walls on the side of the hotel. Lots of benefits, relatively cheap, gets you lots of ticks at committee...

To be fair, the officer recommendation in front of them recommends refusal with one of the reasons being contributions. That would mean it would be a critical factor for the councillors to overturn the officer recommendation, and so you'd expect it to be heavily debated.

Just 'expenses'...

Who owns Bennett's Field......... Mr Bennett. Oh crap I've been sucked in.....

Cllr Joe Miller, you're live on NSC.....MAKE IT COUNT!

Don't do it to yourselves....... Put the snooker on instead.

Whats the betting the reporter has both result stories already typed up ready to, and 2 tweets in draft too......only looks like they've accidentally tweeted one of the drafts....whoops.

Is it on Kodi?