Joel Ninety wrote:I am enjoying the intelligent discussion within this thread.
What is happening with the Beachcomber design that was put forward for a marina? Is that a viable option that is being considered or has it been relegated to merely an award-winning concept?
I am enjoying the intelligent discussion within this thread.
What is happening with the Beachcomber design that was put forward for a marina? Is that a viable option that is being considered or has it been relegated to merely an award-winning concept?
Truth wrote:Would a London billionaire be interested in investing?
In this weeks Visitor (page 6/7 it shows the masterplan but gives no information on the extent of the high rise development and states:- the entire dvelopment consists of 381 flats, 130 additional rooms in a possible Midland Hotel 2, 22 beach houses, 8 commercial units and 616 car park spaces 493 of which are private.
The Visitor also reports that US intend to start on site at the end of 2008 and finish in 2016.
Theres a bit of a discrepancy in the Visitors figures. Its disinfo, why?
Heaton Shrimp wrote:"IMO there is a huge conflict of interest concerning the regeneration of Morecambe and Councillor Archer. She would put the interests of her beloved Winter Gardens before the interests of local ratepayers. All Urban Splash need to do is offer her a few million/assistance to get the Winter Gardens operational and she'd forget representing the best interests of local ratepayers. I am still waiting to see a viable business plan for the Winter Gardens."
You might just have a point there.
maggy wrote:So are you saying John Donnellon went because of the Morecambe bay independents
Truth wrote:If you want to see how the decision making process works at Lancaster City Council I would suggest that you read Mr Portmans (District auditors) report on Blobbygate. Its the truth. A process of a majority of irresponsible councillors just rubber stamping incompetent and huge error of judgement decisions made by top ranking council Officers recommendations.
Well done Truth you've found the Quote button. not quite sure what you're getting at though as you've just quoted one big paragraph and not put any of your own comments or questions in there?
Please could the honorable Mr Shrimper or one of his associates address the misinfo/disinfo in this weeks Visitor.
It states 381 flats when in truth the application totals 533 residential units.
BTW Mr Shrimper no pms lets keep this debate in the public domain and at last on a level playing field.
Peace, truth and respect Mr Shrimper
Truth wrote:
I hope that clarifies the situation and that Mr Shrimper will be able to play ball on that particular question.of professional independent journalism. Acting in the public interest and keeping them fully and properly informed its referred to as by the Press Complaints Commission.
live/work units:- 22 - or 'beach huts'
1 bed flats/maisonettes:- 246
2 bed flats/maisonettes:- 91
bedsit/studios:- 174
which equals 511 (plus the beach huts = 533)
In this weeks Visitor (page 6/7 it shows the masterplan but gives no information on the extent of the high rise development (shows an image, though so I think most people get the idea) and states:- the entire dvelopment consists of 381 flats, 130 additional rooms in a possible Midland Hotel 2 (which would take the form of serviced apartments, as we said in a previous story - but these could also possibly be bedsits)
381 plus 130 also equals 511 - plus the 22 beach huts.
It's about how these units are described in different documents - the figures are the same, though.
Truth wrote:live/work units:- 22 - or 'beach huts'
1 bed flats/maisonettes:- 246
2 bed flats/maisonettes:- 91
bedsit/studios:- 174
which equals 511 (plus the beach huts = 533)
In this weeks Visitor (page 6/7 it shows the masterplan but gives no information on the extent of the high rise development (shows an image, though so I think most people get the idea) and states:- the entire dvelopment consists of 381 flats, 130 additional rooms in a possible Midland Hotel 2 (which would take the form of serviced apartments, as we said in a previous story - but these could also possibly be bedsits)
381 plus 130 also equals 511 - plus the 22 beach huts.
It's about how these units are described in different documents - the figures are the same, though.
Thanx for that clarification and for playing the ball Mr Visitor Editor. Can you inform us which document the Visitor was using when it compiled its report.
My take/opinion = deception.
Key question for local ratepayers, (Dooh sorry Council tax payers) excluding Mr Shrimpers associates..................... Whats your take on Glen Coopers clarification?
BTW Glen could you also clarify which of the blocks shown on the outline plan is the Midland 2
which you refer to and why you failed to bring the proposals to our attention when the date both the outline application for the whole site and phase 1 was submitted to the Council in December 2007.
Peace truth & respect
shrimper wrote:http://www.thevisitor.co.uk/morecambe-news/Morecambe-may-get-second-Midland.3674806.jp
Front page (I thought that was probably enough prominence to inform people). It wasn't December (January) but we were the first to bring it into the public domain and I can't honestly say I knew the precise date of the submission. It may have been that it took a while to be processed, I don't know.
This is my last contribution to this thread.
Thanx for that clarification and for playing the ball Mr Visitor Editor. Can you inform us which document the Visitor was using when it compiled its report.
My take/opinion = deception.
Key question for local ratepayers, (Dooh sorry Council tax payers) excluding Mr Shrimpers associates..................... Whats your take on Glen Coopers clarification?
BTW Glen could you also clarify which of the blocks shown on the outline plan is the Midland 2
which you refer to and why you failed to bring the proposals to our attention when the date both the outline application for the whole site and phase 1 was submitted to the Council in December 2007.
Peace truth & respect
http://www.thevisitor.co.uk/morecambe-news/Morecambe-may-get-second-Midland.3674806.jp
Front page (I thought that was probably enough prominence to inform people). It wasn't December (January) but we were the first to bring it into the public domain and I can't honestly say I knew the precise date of the submission. It may have been that it took a while to be processed, I don't know.
This is my last contribution to this thread.
I'm affraid you've lost my attention on this one now Truth, you've turned it from a very interesting debate to a witch hunt in your own conspiracy theory
shrimper wrote:This is my last contribution to this thread.
Truth wrote:North Stand Shrimp and Paul Mac also take their bats home. Thats their choice but imo actions speak louder than words.
Joel Ninety wrote:I am enjoying the intelligent discussion within this thread.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 6 guests