Jump to content

Row S

03: Full Members
  • Posts

    1,123
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Row S last won the day on January 1 2022

Row S had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Inverness
  • Interests
    ICTFC, bowls, rugby, real ale, red wine, traditional music, rock music & travelling

Recent Profile Visitors

8,001 profile views

Row S's Achievements

First Team Regular

First Team Regular (5/10)

301

Reputation

  1. Welcome intervention from a Jambo.
  2. Gash awful! Thank goodness I'm playing bowls this Saturday.
  3. I think that might still belong to David Sutherland.
  4. You're quite a planning guru wilseywilsey. I was merely pointing out that the Council was quite happy to allocate a large chunk of its own abandoned golf course area (yes, holes 10 to 14 at Torvean) for development in its own IMFLDP but not allocate any of the privately owned former Fairways/Castle Heather 18 hole course for development in the same LDP. That to me is double standards. Of course there are no potential NIMBYs overlooking the Torvean land which is why it probably sailed through the consultation process un-noticed. In the preparation of the 2013 Ness-side and Torvean Development Brief, the Rugby Club was heavily involved in the consultation process. At the time a large area was shown for further sports pitches on that part of the Torvean golf course, partly to compensate for the loss of land at Canal Park and partly to help rugby and football facilities (the Academy at Charleston) expand in future. That all changed in the 2019 update of the Development Brief after the rugby facilities were redeveloped at Canal Park and the West Link road was completed. Thereafter the new IMFLDP merely endorsed that.
  5. Unfortunately, I can't attend as making my biennial pilgrimage to Rome this week. Nevertheless, I'd rather the Club Directors focused on the Planning merits of the proposal. In the officials' report to the last South Planning Applications Committee, their remaining objection issue was the loss of locally important open space, now an abandoned golf course taken over by dog walkers. Then look at the abandoned holes of the old Torvean course, owned by the Highland Council and also taken over by dog walkers. The Council has earmarked that locally important open space for development, mostly for housing and possibly a primary school. Double standards or what? Highland Rugby Club were promised additional pitches on that land but the Council reneged. Worth raising but can we trust the Council to support a development that benefits another important City sports club?
  6. This man has to start the game tomorrow with or without Alex Samuel. Room for Billy too in a front three. Shaw on the right wing?
  7. What has been forgotten is that when granted planning permission in 2004 it was only for a temporary period of 3 years. The club was supposed to have applied for more permanent stands, renew the permission or dismantle the stands before the 3 years was up. The agents told the club that when the permission was granted then again early in 2007. Not even the Council bothered to chase that one up. Technically, they are in breach of planning legislation.
  8. Is that when he gets near the opposition penalty box and should be taking a shot? The 3-5-2 formation and tippy tappy stuff at home isn't working. We need to be more direct and less predictable. For the next few league games I'd like to see a switch to 4-3-3 with Samuel, Pepple and Mckay up front.
  9. Another inept performance at home. This was the same starting line up that did so well against Raith. We desperately need to overcome teams that just sit in and frustrate for 89 minutes at home. Otherwise we will battle relegation for the rest of the season. I'd had enough by 4:25pm and headed home to watch the rugby. With next week's rugby and the Hibs game overlapping today's performance against Queens Park made my mind up which game I'll be watching, even though Scotland faltered after 47 minutes. At least they took their chances that counted by the final whistle.
  10. If not, they won't be getting my money. A decent draw for us though, especially after how close Forfar ran them yesterday. Perhaps we could contribute to the departure of yet another H#bs manager.
  11. The Green Freeport Tax Site only covers the stadium car parks and adjoining land to the North and South. The club doesn't own any of this land. Unless a secret deal has been done recently, the car parks are leased by Tullochs from The Inverness Common Good. So I'm finding it hard to see the benefit to the club. If anything, the loss of that land to development will see the stadium deprived of parking and the club hugely disadvantaged as a result.
  12. It was not so long ago that the Council was prepared to ignore its policy for open space protection to allow roads to be built (1) from the SDR Eagle roundabout into Drakies and (2) to wipe out a well established equipped play area on the long established Drakies buffer land to serve a spurious housing site south of the Police HQ. The large green shed shown in the photo in committee this morning is not a green keepers' shed. It is the Inverness Kart Raceway building, which was also built on the Fairways open space.
  13. Yes, I saw that. I got the impression that most councillors want to approve it but as the technical objections had not been addressed by the applicant they felt they couldn't support it today. Also now have time to explain the 'community benefits' (to ICT). Best outcome in the circumstances.
  14. The nearest houses are about 300 metres from the storage compounds. The Travelodge is about 50m away. No objections from the nearest residents, office occupiers or Travelodge. Lobbying does work in some cases but is normally done by the applicants (ILI not ICTFC).
  15. Yes, it's called lobbying and still happens for some planning applications despite being frowned upon by officials and against Standards and Ethics in local government guidelines. Only 5 busy bodies and one neighbouring community council objected. Very low public interest compared with proposals for 800 houses and a new primary school on the former golf course. I feel that Council Planning officials are applying double standards with National Planning Framework 4 when it comes to ICT's interests. They are happy to see our stadium and its car parks zoned for business and industry in the new Local Development Plan and be part of the Green Freeport area, contrary to other policies of NPF4. Yet they choose to use that document to try and reject a renewable energy development on a very small proportion of a disused golf course, which isn't even "public" open space.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy