slf

Geoff Brown Goes Tae War

Recommended Posts

Those at the top end of P&K Council are in the main, utterly contemptable shitebags who think they can do anything they like and who have   shown  on more than one occasion recently that they have forgotten who the phuck they are meant to represent. The fact that this road is planned to go through part of the crem ( much against the wishes of a large section of the local populous) just highlights their " well do what we want" attitude.  In the first instance Geoff will  do what he has to do to look after our club but at some point  we might need to think about mobilizing out support and  backing him through some disruptive action..

what good would any disruptive action do???

If push comes to shove (which  think it will) we need to be measured in our support of our Club

I am all for some sort of protest at the councils stance on this matter and if its done in a peaceful manner, it will have my backing 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what good would any disruptive action do???

If push comes to shove (which think it will) we need to be measured in our support of our Club

I am all for some sort of protest at the councils stance on this matter and if its done in a peaceful manner, it will have my backing

Peaceful and disruptive are not mutually exclusive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what good would any disruptive action do???

If push comes to shove (which think it will) we need to be measured in our support of our Club

I am all for some sort of protest at the councils stance on this matter and if its done in a peaceful manner, it will have my backing

Peaceful!? With you in attendance? No gonna happen ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the land at Florence Place was sold off about a decade ago to offset the trading losses the club had been making. It turned a significant loss one year into a profit of about £800,000.

 

I think bits of it were sold off in instalments. Geoff Brown referred to it as a drip-feed. Kept our finances in order for a few years in the nineties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2e5016e8_o.png

 

 

St Johnstone bosses have failed to delay an inquiry into a highly controversial road plan that they claim could jeopardise the club’s future.

 

The Saints are battling to block a major new road near their McDiarmid Park home that Perth and Kinross Council believes is necessary to unlock development land to the north of the city, creating jobs and thousands of new homes.

 

The club argues that the relief road will result in the loss of a training pitch that players have been using for nearly 20 years. The local authority – which is using compulsory purchase powers to buy up the land – now claims the pitch is being used illegally.

 

Scottish ministers have called a public inquiry to determine if the compulsory purchase order can proceed.

 

St Johnstone owner Geoff Brown had hoped to the postpone the inquiry to allow time to process a “certificate of lawfulness” application, which he believes will show the training pitch has valid consent.

 

But his plea to halt proceedings was rejected by appeals reporter Michael Cunliffe, who will lead the inquiry.

 

At a meeting between representatives from St Johnstone FC, Perth and Kinross Council and other objectors, Mr Cunliffe said it would be unfair to stall proceedings.

Club spokesman Dennis Munro said: “The impact of the road on the training pitch will, in our view, render it effectively useless.

 

“The council have asserted, rather late in the day, that the use of the training pitch is unlawful. We strongly dispute that and to establish its lawfulness we have applied for a certificate.

 

“That application is presently with the council and it is our view that the inquiry should be sisted until the application is processed because the outcome will have a bearing on the weight of our objection.”

 

He said: “It is such an important issued that the inquiry should be delayed until this is resolved.”

 

Mr Cunliffe said: “There are other parties involved and my inclination would be not to hold up proceedings because of this one issue.”

 

The public inquiry is due to be held in Perth on November 9 and is expected to run for three to five days.

 

A council spokeswoman said the authority was against suggestions that the inquest should be held at McDiarmid Park. A venue will be decided nearer the time. The inquiry will also hear evidence from other objectors including the Pilkington Trust, the Stewart Milne Group and the trustees of Robert Reid.

 

The road project, which will link the city to housing projects at Inveralmond and Bertha Park, already has planning permission, despite scores of objections about its potential impact on Perth Crematorium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2e5016e8_o.png

 

 

St Johnstone bosses have failed to delay an inquiry into a highly controversial road plan that they claim could jeopardise the club’s future.

 

The Saints are battling to block a major new road near their McDiarmid Park home that Perth and Kinross Council believes is necessary to unlock development land to the north of the city, creating jobs and thousands of new homes.

 

The club argues that the relief road will result in the loss of a training pitch that players have been using for nearly 20 years. The local authority – which is using compulsory purchase powers to buy up the land – now claims the pitch is being used illegally.

 

Scottish ministers have called a public inquiry to determine if the compulsory purchase order can proceed.

 

St Johnstone owner Geoff Brown had hoped to the postpone the inquiry to allow time to process a “certificate of lawfulness” application, which he believes will show the training pitch has valid consent.

 

But his plea to halt proceedings was rejected by appeals reporter Michael Cunliffe, who will lead the inquiry.

 

At a meeting between representatives from St Johnstone FC, Perth and Kinross Council and other objectors, Mr Cunliffe said it would be unfair to stall proceedings.

Club spokesman Dennis Munro said: “The impact of the road on the training pitch will, in our view, render it effectively useless.

 

“The council have asserted, rather late in the day, that the use of the training pitch is unlawful. We strongly dispute that and to establish its lawfulness we have applied for a certificate.

 

“That application is presently with the council and it is our view that the inquiry should be sisted until the application is processed because the outcome will have a bearing on the weight of our objection.”

 

He said: “It is such an important issued that the inquiry should be delayed until this is resolved.”

 

Mr Cunliffe said: “There are other parties involved and my inclination would be not to hold up proceedings because of this one issue.”

 

The public inquiry is due to be held in Perth on November 9 and is expected to run for three to five days.

 

A council spokeswoman said the authority was against suggestions that the inquest should be held at McDiarmid Park. A venue will be decided nearer the time. The inquiry will also hear evidence from other objectors including the Pilkington Trust, the Stewart Milne Group and the trustees of Robert Reid.

 

The road project, which will link the city to housing projects at Inveralmond and Bertha Park, already has planning permission, despite scores of objections about its potential impact on Perth Crematorium.

Am I being thick here but I really don't get why the land behind the east stand can't still be our training pitch. The road takes up a fraction of the area looking at the plan. Also why would the north stand have to be taken down? Don't get that either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thinking is that a training pitch next to a busy road isn't safe. Whether that's a negotiating tactic or a real concern I don't know, but footballs and fast moving traffic don't mix, you'd think. On the other hand, the stadium is just as close, and we might draw St Mirren in the cup, and Thomson might take a penalty......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't you just cage the training pitch? I'm sure it would cost a fair bob, but not in the grand scale of the total works

 

I think as Montrose pointed out above its not just the fact of stray balls beside a fast moving road,  the drainage works and associated crap that has to go in beside the proposed road is more of a stumbling block than just simply putting a big high fence up at one end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If these plans go ahead, do we lose the away stand? I thought it is just the training pitch that is affected

 

 

No, the red areas on the plan i posted will be purchased under CPO powers, the green area shows where the Council will take a right of servitude, but it remains in the club's ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Montrose.....the club ought to be call you. The kind of inside info needed from their side!

 

The club are being adequately represented dont worry about that, Dennis Munro the name that was quoted in the article on the previous page is the former Head of Planning with the Council, took early retirement a number of years ago now and took up a post with GS Brown not long after so he will know exactly what he is talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The club are being adequately represented dont worry about that, Dennis Munro the name that was quoted in the article on the previous page is the former Head of Planning with the Council, took early retirement a number of years ago now and took up a post with GS Brown not long after so he will know exactly what he is talking about.

 

 

yeah, exactly, (although Dennis isn't my favourite planner) he knows his stuff.  I'm just trying to fill in a few blanks for folk here as I work in the same profession, and it's a minefield of legislation and bureaucracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...