FC United - Oral Hearing - judge rejects appeal (p 82)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

peoffrey said:
Has anyone asked Ronald Johnson's permission yet?

<a class="postlink" href="http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1490116_plans-to-build-46m-fc-united-stadium-on-ronald-johnson-playing-fields-are-challenged-by-his-great-nephew" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://menmedia.co.uk/manchesterevening ... eat-nephew</a>

One of the last descendents of Ronald Johnson – the man on whose playing fields FC United plan to build a 5,000-capacity stadium – has contacted town hall chiefs to oppose the plans.

The relative, one of two remaining great nephews, wrote to Manchester council to say he and his family ‘stand opposed’ to the proposals.

The news comes after town hall bosses approved the £4.6m project – which includes plans for a public medical room and other community resources. The Ronald Johnson fields, in Moston, were bequeathed to the people of Manchester.

It is understood at least part of the site was placed under a covenant requesting it be reserved for community recreational use.

Some people who live in the surrounding area have fought a campaign against the stadium. But a public consultation carried out by the council suggested most people who expressed a view were in favour of the plans.

The great-nephew’s letter – seen by the M.E.N. – expresses surprise that the authority has not contacted a member of the family for their thoughts on the planned stadium.

The relative, who lives in Cheshire, writes that the land – on which the Richard Johnson, Clapham and Morris wireworks once stood – was handed over by the family to benefit those who lived nearby.

He adds that those people are ‘in the main firmly against the proposed stadium’ and concludes ‘after careful consideration we also stand opposed’. The relative, who does not want to be named, claims in the letter to be a spokesman for the entire family.

But the M.E.N. has contacted a second great-nephew, who said he felt it ‘inappropriate to support or oppose’ the plans because he lives in Kent.

He added that, now planning permission had been granted, he wished the project well – and hoped the Ronald Johnson name would be retained in some form.

FC United are completing legal formalities before work can start.The club declined to comment on the letter.

But Neil Fairlamb, head of sport for Manchester council, said: “The council is satisfied there is no legal reason why the scheme, which will provide extensive community benefits to Moston and North Manchester, should not go ahead. A descendent living in Cheshire, came forward saying they opposed the scheme.

"We have contacted him and offered to meet to explain the plans. He was offered a number of potential dates but he was unable to make these.”

The club hope to be in their new home for the start of the 2013/14 season.

The memory of fallen soldier Ronald Johnson has been kept alive for 90 years - thanks to the playing fields named in his honour.

Johnson – whose family ran a wireworks near the park – lost his life in the trenches of World War I aged 27.

After a high-flying education he had originally taken up a job at the family firm's Australian outpost.

But when war broke out he returned to the Britain to enlist and was signed up to the Royal Field Artillery 23rd Division.

He said he wanted to fight alongside the men who worked in his family's factory.

After surviving a bullet in the Battle of the Somme he returned to the front line, but was killed in action in May 1917.

He is buried at the Brandhoek military cemetery in Belgium.

His will requested that the fields in Moston be purchased for the factory's workers - and in 1922 they were opened in his name.
 
Re: FC United - Judicial Review today (pg 60)

underthemoonlight said:
blue cigar said:
1500!! are you sure? massive club........ were big utd playing at the same time by any chance??

Ya can double that once this super little complex gets built

fcum6.jpg

Isn't that the big Tesco in Prestwich?
 
Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

why are they getting this kind of help? They are an amateur club just like all the rest, no council should be dipping into the public purse for this kind of self interest group, utter joke, I hope they get knocked back.
 
Re: FC United - Judicial Review today (pg 60)

The Future's Blue said:
Mad Eyed Screamer said:
The Future's Blue said:
Sorry for the ignorance but where is all the money coming from?

Sport England, the Football Foundation, the council and money raised via the club / fans themselves.

-- Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:24 pm --

<a class="postlink" href="http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1596470_fc-united-stadium-proper-legal-checks-for-planning-approval-were-ignored-court-hears" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://menmedia.co.uk/manchesterevening ... ourt-hears</a>

Manchester council’s decision to grant planning approval for FC United’s 5,000-capacity stadium was made without proper legal checks, a court has heard.

Permission for the ground, on Ronald Johnson Playing Fields off Lightbowne Road in Moston, was given last year.

A judicial review into the decision to approve the planning application was told that environmental impact assessments into potential noise and traffic pollution, required by law, were not made ahead of the decision.

The town hall claims the assessments were discretionary and that conditions attached to the approval would offset any negative impacts of the development.

Hugh Richards, representing the Residents United Residents Association which opposes the plans, claimed the council had acted illegally through not understanding planning laws.

He said: "The negative effects of the development are being dismissed because they are defined as ‘localised’ and not because they are not significant. The conclusion was being reached that these issues will only be of local significance and therefore the impact was not considered sufficient to warrant an impact assessment.

"The authority’s approach has been to identify the potential impact and then dismiss it as localised. This is a misunderstanding of what’s laid out in planning regulations."

The council was spelling out its position to the review, at Manchester Civil Justice Centre, today. The case is expected to conclude tomorrow.

FC United, formed in protest at the Glazer family’s takeover of Manchester United, had hoped to start work on the new ground this summer. They play at Bury’s Gigg Lane ground and have never had a stadium of their own.

FC United had originally planned to build their ground on Ten Acres Lane in Newton Heath, but a late switch in council funding scuppered the proposals. The stadium is set to cost about £4.6m and the club has raised the cash through fundraising and grants.
Thanks mate but I was more talking exact figures from each respective party. 4.6 million is a hell of a sum and I can't see FCUM raising a 10th of that by selling raffle tickets or doing a jumble sale.

I've been to many non-league grounds and many are in a state of disrepair, why have FCUM got such a tidy pay-off? I mean, can somebody actually state the figure that they are pumping in, it'd be nice to think that they are at least putting 50% of the money up.

Not too far off 50%
 
Re: FC United - Judicial Review today (pg 60)

underthemoonlight said:
The Future's Blue said:
Mad Eyed Screamer said:
Sport England, the Football Foundation, the council and money raised via the club / fans themselves.

-- Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:24 pm --

<a class="postlink" href="http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1596470_fc-united-stadium-proper-legal-checks-for-planning-approval-were-ignored-court-hears" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://menmedia.co.uk/manchesterevening ... ourt-hears</a>

Manchester council’s decision to grant planning approval for FC United’s 5,000-capacity stadium was made without proper legal checks, a court has heard.

Permission for the ground, on Ronald Johnson Playing Fields off Lightbowne Road in Moston, was given last year.

A judicial review into the decision to approve the planning application was told that environmental impact assessments into potential noise and traffic pollution, required by law, were not made ahead of the decision.

The town hall claims the assessments were discretionary and that conditions attached to the approval would offset any negative impacts of the development.

Hugh Richards, representing the Residents United Residents Association which opposes the plans, claimed the council had acted illegally through not understanding planning laws.

He said: "The negative effects of the development are being dismissed because they are defined as ‘localised’ and not because they are not significant. The conclusion was being reached that these issues will only be of local significance and therefore the impact was not considered sufficient to warrant an impact assessment.

"The authority’s approach has been to identify the potential impact and then dismiss it as localised. This is a misunderstanding of what’s laid out in planning regulations."

The council was spelling out its position to the review, at Manchester Civil Justice Centre, today. The case is expected to conclude tomorrow.

FC United, formed in protest at the Glazer family’s takeover of Manchester United, had hoped to start work on the new ground this summer. They play at Bury’s Gigg Lane ground and have never had a stadium of their own.

FC United had originally planned to build their ground on Ten Acres Lane in Newton Heath, but a late switch in council funding scuppered the proposals. The stadium is set to cost about £4.6m and the club has raised the cash through fundraising and grants.
Thanks mate but I was more talking exact figures from each respective party. 4.6 million is a hell of a sum and I can't see FCUM raising a 10th of that by selling raffle tickets or doing a jumble sale.

I've been to many non-league grounds and many are in a state of disrepair, why have FCUM got such a tidy pay-off? I mean, can somebody actually state the figure that they are pumping in, it'd be nice to think that they are at least putting 50% of the money up.

Not too far off 50%

But nowhere to spend it other then paying your rent to Bury
 
Re: FC United - Judicial Review today (pg 60)

Tueartsoverhead kick said:
underthemoonlight said:
The Future's Blue said:
Thanks mate but I was more talking exact figures from each respective party. 4.6 million is a hell of a sum and I can't see FCUM raising a 10th of that by selling raffle tickets or doing a jumble sale.

I've been to many non-league grounds and many are in a state of disrepair, why have FCUM got such a tidy pay-off? I mean, can somebody actually state the figure that they are pumping in, it'd be nice to think that they are at least putting 50% of the money up.

Not too far off 50%

But nowhere to spend it other then paying your rent to Bury[/quo



Why don't they build it in fckin Salford ???
 
Re: FC United - Judicial Review today (pg 60)

LongsightM13 said:
underthemoonlight said:
blue cigar said:
1500!! are you sure? massive club........ were big utd playing at the same time by any chance??

Ya can double that once this super little complex gets built

fcum6.jpg
A monument to vanity and cowardice

Aw look, it's even good its own little megastore and everything. Just like the real thing.
 
Re: FC United - Judicial Review today (pg 60)

underthemoonlight said:
Not too far off 50%
Not far off, it should be at least. How many of our non-league clubs struggle after putting 100% in money, time and effort yet FCUM can't get at least 50%?

I have no qualms with any club setting up, and the financial aspect but over 2.3 million from the public purse for a private investment that maybe making money for the chairman down the line is disgraceful.

Have they not seen the state of the nation?
 
Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

Believe the decision is reserved until New Year (FC website, can't copy link) good or bad sign? Sounds like there is some hope this wont get the go ahead to me as it doesnt seem clear cut.
 
Re: FC United - Judicial Review day 2 (pg 61)

Robbo said:
Believe the decision is reserved until New Year (FC website, can't copy link) good or bad sign? Sounds like there is some hope this wont get the go ahead to me as it doesnt seem clear cut.

Yes thats correct the judgement will be announced sometime in January but what FC have to be careful of is if the judgement goes in our favour then MCC and FC have to make an appeal and how long will that take ? also can MCC justify spending money on an appeal when their cutting budgets, services and jobs how is that going to look, I'm sure MCC will have no loyalty if that is a scenario also FC have funding set up from various organisations which rely on things moving on with a positive outcome their not going to keep hanging on if things get bogged down in appeals etc with no guarantee of a favourable outcome, if they get the decision then we will appeal again were back to how long will that take ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.