Eddie Mitchell defies planning officers as work starts on Cherries' car park

Bournemouth Echo: PLANS: AFC Bournemouth chairman Eddie Mitchell in the gravel car park next to the stadium at Kings Park in Bournemouth. Picture: Corin Messer PLANS: AFC Bournemouth chairman Eddie Mitchell in the gravel car park next to the stadium at Kings Park in Bournemouth. Picture: Corin Messer

AFC Bournemouth chairman Eddie Mitchell has started work on resurfacing the car, coach and lorry park at Dean Court today, despite not having permission to do so.

On Monday, planning chiefs decided to defer the application for the resurfacing and laying out of the car park, asking for clarification on the number of car park spaces there would be and for more details on traffic management.

It was called into the Planning Board by ward councillor Nick King, who raised worries over public access to public green space, disruption to views across the park and the impact on road safety and parking amenities.

But, speaking to the Daily Echo yesterday, Cherries boss Mr Mitchell said he planned to begin work first thing this morning regardless – risking potential enforcement action – as waiting a month would see the offer of £600,000 funding from the club withdrawn.

The club says the work will stop flooding, fly tipping and use of the car park by drivers doing stunts.

Mr Mitchell said: “It’s an addition to the application for the lorry park to be resurfaced and for some unknown reason the council asked us to make an application to remove the bund that’s causing the car park to flood.

“That is part of the resurfacing of the car park and makes more land available for parking. We assumed that was OK and we planned to start work.

“I have to presume it’s the case and we can get on and start resurfacing it.

“That’s what we’re going to do; we do not want to cancel.

“The biggest concern to me is funding was made available to start now and if it’s deferred for a month that’s going to be withdrawn.”

The application had been recommended for approval, with planning officers saying it would bring a formal parking layout and new landscaped areas.

Cllr David Kelsey, Planning Board chairman, said members wanted more details on how match day parking would be accommodated.

“We are concerned that a loss of car park spaces in the area would lead to parking on local roads during match days,” he said.

“This could inconvenience King’s Park and Littledown residents and this was the basis of our decision to defer.

“We need clarity from the club on what agreements they will put in place to provide parking while their works take place,” the councillor added.

Comments (105)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:35am Wed 20 Jun 12

Lord Spring says...

Criminal damage. it is not his property
Criminal damage. it is not his property Lord Spring

9:38am Wed 20 Jun 12

The Renegade Master says...

Although I think the resurfacing work is a good idea, Mitchell's decision to go ahead with the work without permission shows the arrogance of the man and his utter contempt of authority.
Although I think the resurfacing work is a good idea, Mitchell's decision to go ahead with the work without permission shows the arrogance of the man and his utter contempt of authority. The Renegade Master

9:42am Wed 20 Jun 12

afcb-mark says...

Tut Tut Eddie. Obviously it will be his own boys doing the work so to defy the planning authorities he must very desperate for a bit of cash right now.
Tut Tut Eddie. Obviously it will be his own boys doing the work so to defy the planning authorities he must very desperate for a bit of cash right now. afcb-mark

9:48am Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

Go for it Eddie, theres nothing wrong with a bit of contempt for red tape and petty minded Council bureaucracy. The Council must hate being shown how petty and obstructive they are.
Go for it Eddie, theres nothing wrong with a bit of contempt for red tape and petty minded Council bureaucracy. The Council must hate being shown how petty and obstructive they are. harrythered

9:48am Wed 20 Jun 12

*Fiona* says...

This mans behaviour is beyond egotism.

His narcissism and sense of entitlement is out of control.

He has Roman Emperor Syndrome.

Theres something not right about him and he shouldnt be in a leadership position.

He is a liability to the football club.
This mans behaviour is beyond egotism. His narcissism and sense of entitlement is out of control. He has Roman Emperor Syndrome. Theres something not right about him and he shouldnt be in a leadership position. He is a liability to the football club. *Fiona*

9:49am Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

Lord Spring wrote:
Criminal damage. it is not his property
I think you should look up the definition of damage, if you dropped a bomb on the filthy dust bowl you would improve it.
[quote][p][bold]Lord Spring[/bold] wrote: Criminal damage. it is not his property[/p][/quote]I think you should look up the definition of damage, if you dropped a bomb on the filthy dust bowl you would improve it. harrythered

9:57am Wed 20 Jun 12

wallydown says...

Nice one ,get the job done ,well overdue.
If they challenge him in court and they lose its us the tax payers in this town that will pay the costs
excellent strategy
Nice one ,get the job done ,well overdue. If they challenge him in court and they lose its us the tax payers in this town that will pay the costs excellent strategy wallydown

10:03am Wed 20 Jun 12

CourtOffside says...

“We need clarity from the club on what agreements they will put in place to provide parking while their works take place,”

Maybe doing it outside the football season? Like.. now? Duh.
“We need clarity from the club on what agreements they will put in place to provide parking while their works take place,” Maybe doing it outside the football season? Like.. now? Duh. CourtOffside

10:15am Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

CourtOffside wrote:
“We need clarity from the club on what agreements they will put in place to provide parking while their works take place,”

Maybe doing it outside the football season? Like.. now? Duh.
Exactly, how thick are these people. get the job done now before the season starts. This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?
[quote][p][bold]CourtOffside[/bold] wrote: “We need clarity from the club on what agreements they will put in place to provide parking while their works take place,” Maybe doing it outside the football season? Like.. now? Duh.[/p][/quote]Exactly, how thick are these people. get the job done now before the season starts. This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council? harrythered

10:20am Wed 20 Jun 12

andyjb10 says...

Good on you.

The place is a dump and an embarrassment to the council and club.

This only improves the park for all visitors.
Good on you. The place is a dump and an embarrassment to the council and club. This only improves the park for all visitors. andyjb10

10:32am Wed 20 Jun 12

pete woodley says...

If eddie gets away with startng early,the council will not be able to stop others,he is showing complete contempt for the laws.
If eddie gets away with startng early,the council will not be able to stop others,he is showing complete contempt for the laws. pete woodley

10:32am Wed 20 Jun 12

BourneRed says...

Would be nice if the council and Mitchell could use some common sense and get on with it.

The scheme is a good one for local residents, yes there might be a loss of some spaces, but improvements in the infrastructure of the area will improve congestion in the area as the car park will no longer be a free for all.

The whole area will look a lot nicer and to put it bluntly, the positives outweigh the negatives, but get on with it before the season starts to limit the inconvenience on local residents.

The delay doesn't help matters, but neither does getting on with it regardless.
Would be nice if the council and Mitchell could use some common sense and get on with it. The scheme is a good one for local residents, yes there might be a loss of some spaces, but improvements in the infrastructure of the area will improve congestion in the area as the car park will no longer be a free for all. The whole area will look a lot nicer and to put it bluntly, the positives outweigh the negatives, but get on with it before the season starts to limit the inconvenience on local residents. The delay doesn't help matters, but neither does getting on with it regardless. BourneRed

10:41am Wed 20 Jun 12

Bob49 says...

"This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?”

or you ?

Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ?

Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ?

What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?
"This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?” or you ? Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ? Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ? What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ? Bob49

10:44am Wed 20 Jun 12

pete woodley says...

Lord Spring wrote:
Criminal damage. it is not his property
Thats very very true.
[quote][p][bold]Lord Spring[/bold] wrote: Criminal damage. it is not his property[/p][/quote]Thats very very true. pete woodley

10:51am Wed 20 Jun 12

mysticalshoelace says...

I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.
I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch. mysticalshoelace

10:58am Wed 20 Jun 12

pauls55 says...

Anyone with the bottle to stand up to our bureaucratic useless Tory council and sort out this embarrassing eyesore has my support, even if it is the beloved EM!
Anyone with the bottle to stand up to our bureaucratic useless Tory council and sort out this embarrassing eyesore has my support, even if it is the beloved EM! pauls55

11:01am Wed 20 Jun 12

marketboy says...

The Renegade Master wrote:
Although I think the resurfacing work is a good idea, Mitchell's decision to go ahead with the work without permission shows the arrogance of the man and his utter contempt of authority.
No it doesn't,this happens all the the time with planning applications.This is a 'spoiling' tactic by the local Councillor to delay EM and the CLUBS ambition. Go ahead Eddie and ruffle some feathers.
[quote][p][bold]The Renegade Master[/bold] wrote: Although I think the resurfacing work is a good idea, Mitchell's decision to go ahead with the work without permission shows the arrogance of the man and his utter contempt of authority.[/p][/quote]No it doesn't,this happens all the the time with planning applications.This is a 'spoiling' tactic by the local Councillor to delay EM and the CLUBS ambition. Go ahead Eddie and ruffle some feathers. marketboy

11:13am Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

Bob49 wrote:
"This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?”

or you ?

Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ?

Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ?

What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?
I would imagine the deadline is because it is the close season and if the work is completed before the end of July it will cause less inconvenience to residents with supporters having to park elsewhere. As for why the club is backing it and what plans are there - well you don't need a crystal ball to see AFCB plans for a 4th stand and new hotel - they were on public display a couple of weeks ago, and I think you will find the Council still harbour plans for an ice rink as well. Answered your questions I hope......
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: "This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?” or you ? Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ? Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ? What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?[/p][/quote]I would imagine the deadline is because it is the close season and if the work is completed before the end of July it will cause less inconvenience to residents with supporters having to park elsewhere. As for why the club is backing it and what plans are there - well you don't need a crystal ball to see AFCB plans for a 4th stand and new hotel - they were on public display a couple of weeks ago, and I think you will find the Council still harbour plans for an ice rink as well. Answered your questions I hope...... harrythered

11:15am Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

mysticalshoelace wrote:
I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.
I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.
[quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.[/p][/quote]I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it. harrythered

11:21am Wed 20 Jun 12

Pierre France says...

What's the rush? Why is there a self-imposed deadline of the funding not being available after the end of the month? I'm sure the council would have given the green flag to go ahead with the re-surfacing once the red tape had been cut. Now Mitchell has made an enemy out of the council, I'm sure they will do everything they can not to give permission for the proposed 4th stand and hotel.
What's the rush? Why is there a self-imposed deadline of the funding not being available after the end of the month? I'm sure the council would have given the green flag to go ahead with the re-surfacing once the red tape had been cut. Now Mitchell has made an enemy out of the council, I'm sure they will do everything they can not to give permission for the proposed 4th stand and hotel. Pierre France

11:25am Wed 20 Jun 12

muscliffman says...

Confusing.
I am inclined to applaud this victory of common sense over protracted and questionable public sector bureaucracy - there is a very sound case to improve this area.
However this land belongs (in trust) to the public and rightly or wrongly our representatives have not yet given the go ahead.
There is also an undeniable irony in finding someone tarmacing King's Park without permission given the Parks 'traveller' occupation histoy! (Are they doing it?).
However I suspect Mr Mitchell is going to find himself in serious trouble over this.
Confusing. I am inclined to applaud this victory of common sense over protracted and questionable public sector bureaucracy - there is a very sound case to improve this area. However this land belongs (in trust) to the public and rightly or wrongly our representatives have not yet given the go ahead. There is also an undeniable irony in finding someone tarmacing King's Park without permission given the Parks 'traveller' occupation histoy! (Are they doing it?). However I suspect Mr Mitchell is going to find himself in serious trouble over this. muscliffman

11:25am Wed 20 Jun 12

wallydown says...

Tell the council youre building a surf reef it will rubber stamped . Its okay for this council to spend our money willy nilly on set to fail projects that cost us all but Eddie Mitchell isnt asking them to fund it just let him do the job ,it will be approved at some point anyway .a nice bit of tarmac beats dust and gravel hands down
Tell the council youre building a surf reef it will rubber stamped . Its okay for this council to spend our money willy nilly on set to fail projects that cost us all but Eddie Mitchell isnt asking them to fund it just let him do the job ,it will be approved at some point anyway .a nice bit of tarmac beats dust and gravel hands down wallydown

11:28am Wed 20 Jun 12

wallydown says...

Pierre France wrote:
What's the rush? Why is there a self-imposed deadline of the funding not being available after the end of the month? I'm sure the council would have given the green flag to go ahead with the re-surfacing once the red tape had been cut. Now Mitchell has made an enemy out of the council, I'm sure they will do everything they can not to give permission for the proposed 4th stand and hotel.
The reason for planning appeals is to stop councils making it personal
[quote][p][bold]Pierre France[/bold] wrote: What's the rush? Why is there a self-imposed deadline of the funding not being available after the end of the month? I'm sure the council would have given the green flag to go ahead with the re-surfacing once the red tape had been cut. Now Mitchell has made an enemy out of the council, I'm sure they will do everything they can not to give permission for the proposed 4th stand and hotel.[/p][/quote]The reason for planning appeals is to stop councils making it personal wallydown

11:34am Wed 20 Jun 12

Bob49 says...

harrythered wrote:
Bob49 wrote:
"This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?”

or you ?

Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ?

Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ?

What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?
I would imagine the deadline is because it is the close season and if the work is completed before the end of July it will cause less inconvenience to residents with supporters having to park elsewhere. As for why the club is backing it and what plans are there - well you don't need a crystal ball to see AFCB plans for a 4th stand and new hotel - they were on public display a couple of weeks ago, and I think you will find the Council still harbour plans for an ice rink as well. Answered your questions I hope......
The deadline does NOT talk of work commencing, but funding being withdrawn.

There is already enough hard standing parking for the hotel and the fourth stand does not require hard standing. The work could easily be completed between games.

The council never 'harboured' plans for an ice rink. The original plans were so flawed it was obvious they were never intended to be developed, and were quickly forgotten once the required planning permission was given.



ps I suggest you wise up a bit harry.
[quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: "This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?” or you ? Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ? Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ? What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?[/p][/quote]I would imagine the deadline is because it is the close season and if the work is completed before the end of July it will cause less inconvenience to residents with supporters having to park elsewhere. As for why the club is backing it and what plans are there - well you don't need a crystal ball to see AFCB plans for a 4th stand and new hotel - they were on public display a couple of weeks ago, and I think you will find the Council still harbour plans for an ice rink as well. Answered your questions I hope......[/p][/quote]The deadline does NOT talk of work commencing, but funding being withdrawn. There is already enough hard standing parking for the hotel and the fourth stand does not require hard standing. The work could easily be completed between games. The council never 'harboured' plans for an ice rink. The original plans were so flawed it was obvious they were never intended to be developed, and were quickly forgotten once the required planning permission was given. ps I suggest you wise up a bit harry. Bob49

11:40am Wed 20 Jun 12

pete woodley says...

Eddie already has them eating out of his hand,he is getting away with it and wants more and more of Kings Park.
Eddie already has them eating out of his hand,he is getting away with it and wants more and more of Kings Park. pete woodley

11:49am Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

Bob49 wrote:
harrythered wrote:
Bob49 wrote:
"This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?”

or you ?

Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ?

Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ?

What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?
I would imagine the deadline is because it is the close season and if the work is completed before the end of July it will cause less inconvenience to residents with supporters having to park elsewhere. As for why the club is backing it and what plans are there - well you don't need a crystal ball to see AFCB plans for a 4th stand and new hotel - they were on public display a couple of weeks ago, and I think you will find the Council still harbour plans for an ice rink as well. Answered your questions I hope......
The deadline does NOT talk of work commencing, but funding being withdrawn.

There is already enough hard standing parking for the hotel and the fourth stand does not require hard standing. The work could easily be completed between games.

The council never 'harboured' plans for an ice rink. The original plans were so flawed it was obvious they were never intended to be developed, and were quickly forgotten once the required planning permission was given.



ps I suggest you wise up a bit harry.
Well if funding is likely to be withdrawn it would suggest to anyone with a brain cell that work would commence immediately upon permission being given to start. There is very little hard standing available for a hotel on a match day and in any event who would build a hotel and expect guests to endure the dust bowl outside the front door and window of your room, sure work could go on between games but isn't it better to get it over and done with in the close season? As for the ice rink - you need to wise up, the Council is still in talks with a major developer.
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: "This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?” or you ? Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ? Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ? What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?[/p][/quote]I would imagine the deadline is because it is the close season and if the work is completed before the end of July it will cause less inconvenience to residents with supporters having to park elsewhere. As for why the club is backing it and what plans are there - well you don't need a crystal ball to see AFCB plans for a 4th stand and new hotel - they were on public display a couple of weeks ago, and I think you will find the Council still harbour plans for an ice rink as well. Answered your questions I hope......[/p][/quote]The deadline does NOT talk of work commencing, but funding being withdrawn. There is already enough hard standing parking for the hotel and the fourth stand does not require hard standing. The work could easily be completed between games. The council never 'harboured' plans for an ice rink. The original plans were so flawed it was obvious they were never intended to be developed, and were quickly forgotten once the required planning permission was given. ps I suggest you wise up a bit harry.[/p][/quote]Well if funding is likely to be withdrawn it would suggest to anyone with a brain cell that work would commence immediately upon permission being given to start. There is very little hard standing available for a hotel on a match day and in any event who would build a hotel and expect guests to endure the dust bowl outside the front door and window of your room, sure work could go on between games but isn't it better to get it over and done with in the close season? As for the ice rink - you need to wise up, the Council is still in talks with a major developer. harrythered

11:51am Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

pete woodley wrote:
Eddie already has them eating out of his hand,he is getting away with it and wants more and more of Kings Park.
where does it say that the club or EM is being given the land, it doesn't and that is because the Council will retain ownership just as with the training pitches.
[quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Eddie already has them eating out of his hand,he is getting away with it and wants more and more of Kings Park.[/p][/quote]where does it say that the club or EM is being given the land, it doesn't and that is because the Council will retain ownership just as with the training pitches. harrythered

11:55am Wed 20 Jun 12

*Fiona* says...

He's unprofessional.

He's getting some kind of perverse kick out of his blatant disregard of Bmth Councils authority-look at his smug facial expression.

Its like he's saying

'come and have a go if you think your hard enough'
He's unprofessional. He's getting some kind of perverse kick out of his blatant disregard of Bmth Councils authority-look at his smug facial expression. Its like he's saying 'come and have a go if you think your hard enough' *Fiona*

11:57am Wed 20 Jun 12

mysticalshoelace says...

harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote:
I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.
I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.
I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches!
[quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.[/p][/quote]I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.[/p][/quote]I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches! mysticalshoelace

12:01pm Wed 20 Jun 12

John T says...

*Fiona* wrote:
This mans behaviour is beyond egotism. His narcissism and sense of entitlement is out of control. He has Roman Emperor Syndrome. Theres something not right about him and he shouldnt be in a leadership position. He is a liability to the football club.
By referring to Mitchell having Roman Emperor Syndrome, I assume you are likening him to Emperor Nero who fiddled while Rome burned after a fire ignited by himself to clear land for his own palatial ambitions.
Mitchell certainly knows how to fiddle and the rest, as they say, will soon be history. Nearly all the Roman Emperors got their comeuppance; and so in the not too distant future will the Seven Developments Empire.
This is probably the reason why Mitchell is wanting to rush through the 'supposed' funding.
Like with the Surf Greef, it will be the Council taxpayer who ultimately picks up the bill for this skullduggery.
[quote][p][bold]*Fiona*[/bold] wrote: This mans behaviour is beyond egotism. His narcissism and sense of entitlement is out of control. He has Roman Emperor Syndrome. Theres something not right about him and he shouldnt be in a leadership position. He is a liability to the football club.[/p][/quote]By referring to Mitchell having Roman Emperor Syndrome, I assume you are likening him to Emperor Nero who fiddled while Rome burned after a fire ignited by himself to clear land for his own palatial ambitions. Mitchell certainly knows how to fiddle and the rest, as they say, will soon be history. Nearly all the Roman Emperors got their comeuppance; and so in the not too distant future will the Seven Developments Empire. This is probably the reason why Mitchell is wanting to rush through the 'supposed' funding. Like with the Surf Greef, it will be the Council taxpayer who ultimately picks up the bill for this skullduggery. John T

12:02pm Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.
I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation. harrythered

12:05pm Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

mysticalshoelace wrote:
harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote:
I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.
I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.
I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches!
I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.”
[quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.[/p][/quote]I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.[/p][/quote]I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches![/p][/quote]I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.” harrythered

12:10pm Wed 20 Jun 12

John T says...

*Fiona* wrote:
He's unprofessional. He's getting some kind of perverse kick out of his blatant disregard of Bmth Councils authority-look at his smug facial expression. Its like he's saying 'come and have a go if you think your hard enough'
Same old, same old...Mitchell, not Messer, that is.

What's with the shades, Eddie?
Will the true Edmund Mitchell step forward?
[quote][p][bold]*Fiona*[/bold] wrote: He's unprofessional. He's getting some kind of perverse kick out of his blatant disregard of Bmth Councils authority-look at his smug facial expression. Its like he's saying 'come and have a go if you think your hard enough'[/p][/quote]Same old, same old...Mitchell, not Messer, that is. What's with the shades, Eddie? Will the true Edmund Mitchell step forward? John T

12:15pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Freddie frog says...

You hit the nail on the head 'harrythered' the 'Park' is for All the people of Bournemouth not just AFC Bournemouth Fans! Flooding was mentioned in the article, where exactly does EM think the water will go when the whole of the area has a surface of black tar? How many Parks do you know that have such large car parks for 'park users' maybe these were the reasons for deferring the decision. Not some cllrs whim as some have suggested.
You hit the nail on the head 'harrythered' the 'Park' is for All the people of Bournemouth not just AFC Bournemouth Fans! Flooding was mentioned in the article, where exactly does EM think the water will go when the whole of the area has a surface of black tar? How many Parks do you know that have such large car parks for 'park users' maybe these were the reasons for deferring the decision. Not some cllrs whim as some have suggested. Freddie frog

12:22pm Wed 20 Jun 12

mysticalshoelace says...

harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote:
harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote:
I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.
I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.
I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches!
I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.”
My point is that there's not much park left in Kings Park and each year it shrinks a little bit more. There really isn't the need for so many athletics/football/a
ny other type of sport pitches and a failing football club which shouldn't be there in the first place.
[quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.[/p][/quote]I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.[/p][/quote]I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches![/p][/quote]I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.”[/p][/quote]My point is that there's not much park left in Kings Park and each year it shrinks a little bit more. There really isn't the need for so many athletics/football/a ny other type of sport pitches and a failing football club which shouldn't be there in the first place. mysticalshoelace

12:32pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Pierre France says...

*Fiona* wrote:
He's unprofessional.

He's getting some kind of perverse kick out of his blatant disregard of Bmth Councils authority-look at his smug facial expression.

Its like he's saying

'come and have a go if you think your hard enough'
The lady does protest too much. Wasn't Mitchell hard enough for you, Fiona?
[quote][p][bold]*Fiona*[/bold] wrote: He's unprofessional. He's getting some kind of perverse kick out of his blatant disregard of Bmth Councils authority-look at his smug facial expression. Its like he's saying 'come and have a go if you think your hard enough'[/p][/quote]The lady does protest too much. Wasn't Mitchell hard enough for you, Fiona? Pierre France

12:34pm Wed 20 Jun 12

ben131297 says...

ONE RULE FOR THE RICH......
ONE RULE FOR THE RICH...... ben131297

12:39pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Redgolfer00 says...

harrythered wrote:
Go for it Eddie, theres nothing wrong with a bit of contempt for red tape and petty minded Council bureaucracy. The Council must hate being shown how petty and obstructive they are.
Send Mitchell to Australia, who the HELL does he think he is, company must be hard up so hit him with a large fine or is it one rule for him another for every one else and the Aussie's would not let him in.
[quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: Go for it Eddie, theres nothing wrong with a bit of contempt for red tape and petty minded Council bureaucracy. The Council must hate being shown how petty and obstructive they are.[/p][/quote]Send Mitchell to Australia, who the HELL does he think he is, company must be hard up so hit him with a large fine or is it one rule for him another for every one else and the Aussie's would not let him in. Redgolfer00

12:45pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Redgolfer00 says...

harrythered wrote:
pete woodley wrote:
Eddie already has them eating out of his hand,he is getting away with it and wants more and more of Kings Park.
where does it say that the club or EM is being given the land, it doesn't and that is because the Council will retain ownership just as with the training pitches.
Not for 125 years as the lease states.
[quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Eddie already has them eating out of his hand,he is getting away with it and wants more and more of Kings Park.[/p][/quote]where does it say that the club or EM is being given the land, it doesn't and that is because the Council will retain ownership just as with the training pitches.[/p][/quote]Not for 125 years as the lease states. Redgolfer00

12:51pm Wed 20 Jun 12

darcyknows says...

Bob49 wrote:
"This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?”

or you ?

Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ?

Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ?

What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?
a HOTEL ?.
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: "This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?” or you ? Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ? Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ? What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?[/p][/quote]a HOTEL ?. darcyknows

12:56pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Roband65 says...

Lets be honest he has to find some work for his lads now seven and gee have hit rock bottom !
Lets be honest he has to find some work for his lads now seven and gee have hit rock bottom ! Roband65

1:03pm Wed 20 Jun 12

carr58 says...

Well done why wait for the time wasters and at least he is creating real employment.
Well done why wait for the time wasters and at least he is creating real employment. carr58

1:11pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Afcbpete says...

I can only go back to my one big concern regarding all these buiding works that Mitchell wants to do, WHO is paying for it in the long run. Will it go down as loans against the football club, which he will be getting 6% interest on, plus it's work for his workforce, or is he really that concerned. I'm not convinced it's the latter sadly and this is the major concern that many AFCB supportes have. That said, the areas being re-vamped are and always have been an absolute disgrace, so if it's not to the financial detriment of the football club, then I'm all for it. I am however, VERY, very suspicious!!!
I can only go back to my one big concern regarding all these buiding works that Mitchell wants to do, WHO is paying for it in the long run. Will it go down as loans against the football club, which he will be getting 6% interest on, plus it's work for his workforce, or is he really that concerned. I'm not convinced it's the latter sadly and this is the major concern that many AFCB supportes have. That said, the areas being re-vamped are and always have been an absolute disgrace, so if it's not to the financial detriment of the football club, then I'm all for it. I am however, VERY, very suspicious!!! Afcbpete

1:24pm Wed 20 Jun 12

alasdair1967 says...

Some people astound me ,yesterday when the story broke the council and especially mr king where the villains and people where encouraging eddie Mitchell to get on and do the work.now he is getting on with the work he is now the villan at the end of the day the work is being done at zero cost to the bournemouth council tax payers it is going to be a vast improvement on the current eyesore and with the drainage systems in place no longer a flood plain !
Some people astound me ,yesterday when the story broke the council and especially mr king where the villains and people where encouraging eddie Mitchell to get on and do the work.now he is getting on with the work he is now the villan at the end of the day the work is being done at zero cost to the bournemouth council tax payers it is going to be a vast improvement on the current eyesore and with the drainage systems in place no longer a flood plain ! alasdair1967

1:25pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Bob49 says...

harrythered wrote:
Bob49 wrote:
harrythered wrote:
Bob49 wrote:
"This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?”

or you ?

Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ?

Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ?

What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?
I would imagine the deadline is because it is the close season and if the work is completed before the end of July it will cause less inconvenience to residents with supporters having to park elsewhere. As for why the club is backing it and what plans are there - well you don't need a crystal ball to see AFCB plans for a 4th stand and new hotel - they were on public display a couple of weeks ago, and I think you will find the Council still harbour plans for an ice rink as well. Answered your questions I hope......
The deadline does NOT talk of work commencing, but funding being withdrawn.

There is already enough hard standing parking for the hotel and the fourth stand does not require hard standing. The work could easily be completed between games.

The council never 'harboured' plans for an ice rink. The original plans were so flawed it was obvious they were never intended to be developed, and were quickly forgotten once the required planning permission was given.



ps I suggest you wise up a bit harry.
Well if funding is likely to be withdrawn it would suggest to anyone with a brain cell that work would commence immediately upon permission being given to start. There is very little hard standing available for a hotel on a match day and in any event who would build a hotel and expect guests to endure the dust bowl outside the front door and window of your room, sure work could go on between games but isn't it better to get it over and done with in the close season? As for the ice rink - you need to wise up, the Council is still in talks with a major developer.
dear me

I'm not sure what the first bit of mumbo jumbo is supposed to mean, but it ceetainly doesn't answer the point ie why is the funding being theatened to be with drawn.

Surely if this is such ' a good thing' as the not to bright seem to have deluded themselves about then it should be pursued vigorously, not treated in this infantile manner.

Any necessary car park work can be done WHEN the hotel is built. Something that will cause far more disruption and would be best built BEFORE resurfacing the car park.

As to the twaddle about "the Council is still in talks with a major developer" then you are even more deluded than your earlier pots would suggest. Not deluded in the sense that you think such nonsense is true, but that you think that we would belief such rubbish.

A club that has struggled with solvency is hardly the best club to be spending £600,000 on a carpark. So what is the REAL REASON for this 'land grab' .....

....... another part of the supposed regeneration of Boscombe !
[quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: "This is a win - win project for everyone, how dumb is this Council?” or you ? Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ? Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden dealine on things ? What is really being lined up for this site that will need daily use of the car park ?[/p][/quote]I would imagine the deadline is because it is the close season and if the work is completed before the end of July it will cause less inconvenience to residents with supporters having to park elsewhere. As for why the club is backing it and what plans are there - well you don't need a crystal ball to see AFCB plans for a 4th stand and new hotel - they were on public display a couple of weeks ago, and I think you will find the Council still harbour plans for an ice rink as well. Answered your questions I hope......[/p][/quote]The deadline does NOT talk of work commencing, but funding being withdrawn. There is already enough hard standing parking for the hotel and the fourth stand does not require hard standing. The work could easily be completed between games. The council never 'harboured' plans for an ice rink. The original plans were so flawed it was obvious they were never intended to be developed, and were quickly forgotten once the required planning permission was given. ps I suggest you wise up a bit harry.[/p][/quote]Well if funding is likely to be withdrawn it would suggest to anyone with a brain cell that work would commence immediately upon permission being given to start. There is very little hard standing available for a hotel on a match day and in any event who would build a hotel and expect guests to endure the dust bowl outside the front door and window of your room, sure work could go on between games but isn't it better to get it over and done with in the close season? As for the ice rink - you need to wise up, the Council is still in talks with a major developer.[/p][/quote]dear me I'm not sure what the first bit of mumbo jumbo is supposed to mean, but it ceetainly doesn't answer the point ie why is the funding being theatened to be with drawn. Surely if this is such ' a good thing' as the not to bright seem to have deluded themselves about then it should be pursued vigorously, not treated in this infantile manner. Any necessary car park work can be done WHEN the hotel is built. Something that will cause far more disruption and would be best built BEFORE resurfacing the car park. As to the twaddle about "the Council is still in talks with a major developer" then you are even more deluded than your earlier pots would suggest. Not deluded in the sense that you think such nonsense is true, but that you think that we would belief such rubbish. A club that has struggled with solvency is hardly the best club to be spending £600,000 on a carpark. So what is the REAL REASON for this 'land grab' ..... ....... another part of the supposed regeneration of Boscombe ! Bob49

1:31pm Wed 20 Jun 12

simong says...

Well done Eddie Mitchell. If we rely upon the local council or the jobsworth's that 'work' there nothing would ever get done - except of course when one of the fools comes up with an idea like the IMAX or surf reef.
Well done Eddie Mitchell. If we rely upon the local council or the jobsworth's that 'work' there nothing would ever get done - except of course when one of the fools comes up with an idea like the IMAX or surf reef. simong

1:38pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Bob49 says...

simong wrote:
Well done Eddie Mitchell. If we rely upon the local council or the jobsworth's that 'work' there nothing would ever get done - except of course when one of the fools comes up with an idea like the IMAX or surf reef.
And you wonder why Nigerian fraudsters keep going

They would have a field day on here
[quote][p][bold]simong[/bold] wrote: Well done Eddie Mitchell. If we rely upon the local council or the jobsworth's that 'work' there nothing would ever get done - except of course when one of the fools comes up with an idea like the IMAX or surf reef.[/p][/quote]And you wonder why Nigerian fraudsters keep going They would have a field day on here Bob49

1:43pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Ferndown Steve says...

Everyone will win in this situation - The Council haven't got the money- The job when finished will enhance the area to the BENEFIT of the Council and AFC Bournemouth !
The details/discussions can continue on site, as works progress !
Everyone will win in this situation - The Council haven't got the money- The job when finished will enhance the area to the BENEFIT of the Council and AFC Bournemouth ! The details/discussions can continue on site, as works progress ! Ferndown Steve

1:46pm Wed 20 Jun 12

alasdair1967 says...

The thing that strikes me is the people complaining about the work going ahead would be the first complaining to the council if there car where to be damaged by a pot hole in the current car park
The thing that strikes me is the people complaining about the work going ahead would be the first complaining to the council if there car where to be damaged by a pot hole in the current car park alasdair1967

1:46pm Wed 20 Jun 12

psatlast says...

I've no doubt that,like Tesco,the planning permission will be backdated.
I've no doubt that,like Tesco,the planning permission will be backdated. psatlast

1:58pm Wed 20 Jun 12

ElmerFudd says...

I can't say I'm EM's greatest fan, but let's just break this matter down to simple component parts and arguments. The current car park is not suitable for the locality's biggest sporting venue. So, EM wants to stick some tarmac down and tidy it up and make it a more reasonable parking facility.... oh, and he's doing it outside the football season to minimise the impact.
So, the Council want to d**k around wasting committee time and money (sorry, that's actually TAXPAYERS time and money) deciding what will most probably be approved anyway.
Now, if he was putting up a building without permission, fair enough, tear it down. But this is tidying up an exisiting naff parking facility into a more respectable parking facility. No change of use, no permanancy about it (tarmac can be taken up again), and everyone goes hell for leather at him, which reading some of these comments seem to be mostly jealousy about his wealth, actual or otherwise.
Bmth BC's bunch of Planning Muppets need to get a life and worry about the real illegal planning and back-handers that go on!
I can't say I'm EM's greatest fan, but let's just break this matter down to simple component parts and arguments. The current car park is not suitable for the locality's biggest sporting venue. So, EM wants to stick some tarmac down and tidy it up and make it a more reasonable parking facility.... oh, and he's doing it outside the football season to minimise the impact. So, the Council want to d**k around wasting committee time and money (sorry, that's actually TAXPAYERS time and money) deciding what will most probably be approved anyway. Now, if he was putting up a building without permission, fair enough, tear it down. But this is tidying up an exisiting naff parking facility into a more respectable parking facility. No change of use, no permanancy about it (tarmac can be taken up again), and everyone goes hell for leather at him, which reading some of these comments seem to be mostly jealousy about his wealth, actual or otherwise. Bmth BC's bunch of Planning Muppets need to get a life and worry about the real illegal planning and back-handers that go on! ElmerFudd

2:02pm Wed 20 Jun 12

pete woodley says...

People jealous of Mitchell,you have to be joking,the majority of the public would not like to be associated with him in any way.
People jealous of Mitchell,you have to be joking,the majority of the public would not like to be associated with him in any way. pete woodley

2:36pm Wed 20 Jun 12

ASM says...

i want to know who is paying for this 600k tarmac job? the money is just going in mitchells pocket, is it coming out of the fans or denims pocket? also has denim actually put money in the club? - what with the latest addition to our enormous strike force and wage bill at dean court
i want to know who is paying for this 600k tarmac job? the money is just going in mitchells pocket, is it coming out of the fans or denims pocket? also has denim actually put money in the club? - what with the latest addition to our enormous strike force and wage bill at dean court ASM

2:45pm Wed 20 Jun 12

John T says...

Afcbpete wrote:
I can only go back to my one big concern regarding all these buiding works that Mitchell wants to do, WHO is paying for it in the long run. Will it go down as loans against the football club, which he will be getting 6% interest on, plus it's work for his workforce, or is he really that concerned. I'm not convinced it's the latter sadly and this is the major concern that many AFCB supportes have. That said, the areas being re-vamped are and always have been an absolute disgrace, so if it's not to the financial detriment of the football club, then I'm all for it. I am however, VERY, very suspicious!!!
You ask 'WHO is paying for it in the long run?'

Ultimately, it will be a combination of the national and local Council taxpayers, when Mitchell goes bust again. He also has a record of ignoring planning regulations, which then also costs the taxpayer more in sorting out disputes.
Prepare yourselves for Pieces of 8 Developments!
[quote][p][bold]Afcbpete[/bold] wrote: I can only go back to my one big concern regarding all these buiding works that Mitchell wants to do, WHO is paying for it in the long run. Will it go down as loans against the football club, which he will be getting 6% interest on, plus it's work for his workforce, or is he really that concerned. I'm not convinced it's the latter sadly and this is the major concern that many AFCB supportes have. That said, the areas being re-vamped are and always have been an absolute disgrace, so if it's not to the financial detriment of the football club, then I'm all for it. I am however, VERY, very suspicious!!![/p][/quote]You ask 'WHO is paying for it in the long run?' Ultimately, it will be a combination of the national and local Council taxpayers, when Mitchell goes bust again. He also has a record of ignoring planning regulations, which then also costs the taxpayer more in sorting out disputes. Prepare yourselves for Pieces of 8 Developments! John T

2:50pm Wed 20 Jun 12

oneshortleg says...

Arrogance is nothing to be proud of, hope they throw the book at him!
Arrogance is nothing to be proud of, hope they throw the book at him! oneshortleg

2:55pm Wed 20 Jun 12

BmthNewshound says...

If the planning officers recommended the approval of the application why was it turned down ?
.
This decision isn't about planning its about personality. If it was just have been AFC Bournemouth there wouldn't have been an issue. But as always in Bournemouth its about whether your face fits.
.
It never ceases to amaze me how every successful businessman in Bournemouth is villified by the council, the Echo and certain regular contributors to these comments (Hi, **Fiona** !).
.
If the planning officers recommended the approval of the application why was it turned down ? . This decision isn't about planning its about personality. If it was just have been AFC Bournemouth there wouldn't have been an issue. But as always in Bournemouth its about whether your face fits. . It never ceases to amaze me how every successful businessman in Bournemouth is villified by the council, the Echo and certain regular contributors to these comments (Hi, **Fiona** !). . BmthNewshound

2:57pm Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

mysticalshoelace wrote:
harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote:
harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote:
I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.
I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.
I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches!
I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.”
My point is that there's not much park left in Kings Park and each year it shrinks a little bit more. There really isn't the need for so many athletics/football/a

ny other type of sport pitches and a failing football club which shouldn't be there in the first place.
I think you will find the football club has been there for getting on for a century and is actually on land bequeathed it by the Cooper Dean Estate.
[quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.[/p][/quote]I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.[/p][/quote]I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches![/p][/quote]I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.”[/p][/quote]My point is that there's not much park left in Kings Park and each year it shrinks a little bit more. There really isn't the need for so many athletics/football/a ny other type of sport pitches and a failing football club which shouldn't be there in the first place.[/p][/quote]I think you will find the football club has been there for getting on for a century and is actually on land bequeathed it by the Cooper Dean Estate. harrythered

3:07pm Wed 20 Jun 12

CourtOffside says...

Roband65 wrote:
Lets be honest he has to find some work for his lads now seven and gee have hit rock bottom !
The other car park work was undertaken by M A Hart. Not any of Mitchell's companies. He doesn't have the groundwork skills in house.
[quote][p][bold]Roband65[/bold] wrote: Lets be honest he has to find some work for his lads now seven and gee have hit rock bottom ![/p][/quote]The other car park work was undertaken by M A Hart. Not any of Mitchell's companies. He doesn't have the groundwork skills in house. CourtOffside

3:25pm Wed 20 Jun 12

EGHH says...

Lets hope he gets prosecuted and the car park ripped up at his expense.
Lets hope he gets prosecuted and the car park ripped up at his expense. EGHH

3:28pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Talkingheadera says...

Freddie frog wrote:
You hit the nail on the head 'harrythered' the 'Park' is for All the people of Bournemouth not just AFC Bournemouth Fans! Flooding was mentioned in the article, where exactly does EM think the water will go when the whole of the area has a surface of black tar? How many Parks do you know that have such large car parks for 'park users' maybe these were the reasons for deferring the decision. Not some cllrs whim as some have suggested.
It's called drainage thicko
[quote][p][bold]Freddie frog[/bold] wrote: You hit the nail on the head 'harrythered' the 'Park' is for All the people of Bournemouth not just AFC Bournemouth Fans! Flooding was mentioned in the article, where exactly does EM think the water will go when the whole of the area has a surface of black tar? How many Parks do you know that have such large car parks for 'park users' maybe these were the reasons for deferring the decision. Not some cllrs whim as some have suggested.[/p][/quote]It's called drainage thicko Talkingheadera

3:37pm Wed 20 Jun 12

harrythered says...

EGHH wrote:
Lets hope he gets prosecuted and the car park ripped up at his expense.
No lets hope he gets permission to improve this desolate windblown wasteland that has been neglected by the Council for decades.
[quote][p][bold]EGHH[/bold] wrote: Lets hope he gets prosecuted and the car park ripped up at his expense.[/p][/quote]No lets hope he gets permission to improve this desolate windblown wasteland that has been neglected by the Council for decades. harrythered

3:56pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Square Old Codger says...

Talkingheadera wrote:
Freddie frog wrote: You hit the nail on the head 'harrythered' the 'Park' is for All the people of Bournemouth not just AFC Bournemouth Fans! Flooding was mentioned in the article, where exactly does EM think the water will go when the whole of the area has a surface of black tar? How many Parks do you know that have such large car parks for 'park users' maybe these were the reasons for deferring the decision. Not some cllrs whim as some have suggested.
It's called drainage thicko
I would remind you that the area concerned is the lorry park for Bournemouth and is a pot holed mess and is only used by cars when there is either a match at Dean Court or an Athletics meeting. No buildings are to be ererected and all the proposed work can do is to improve the area for the users of the car park. Quite why an isolated ,idiotic, Councillor found to complain about isn't understandable, none of the residents complained ( they have common sense) , how can it spoil the view to give the lorry park a proper surface, it's not using any more of the Park than it already does and he has no case. Just the action of an unecessary "joobsworth" with nothing better to do with his time Time we merged with Poole and cut the number of Councillors and Officials by at least 50%. Having said that, Mitchell is a fool to proceed without permission and it could cost him dear - it wont be forgotten either, should he ever come to develop the South End. The Law may be an ****, but it should be obeyed.
[quote][p][bold]Talkingheadera[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freddie frog[/bold] wrote: You hit the nail on the head 'harrythered' the 'Park' is for All the people of Bournemouth not just AFC Bournemouth Fans! Flooding was mentioned in the article, where exactly does EM think the water will go when the whole of the area has a surface of black tar? How many Parks do you know that have such large car parks for 'park users' maybe these were the reasons for deferring the decision. Not some cllrs whim as some have suggested.[/p][/quote]It's called drainage thicko[/p][/quote]I would remind you that the area concerned is the lorry park for Bournemouth and is a pot holed mess and is only used by cars when there is either a match at Dean Court or an Athletics meeting. No buildings are to be ererected and all the proposed work can do is to improve the area for the users of the car park. Quite why an isolated ,idiotic, Councillor found to complain about isn't understandable, none of the residents complained ( they have common sense) , how can it spoil the view to give the lorry park a proper surface, it's not using any more of the Park than it already does and he has no case. Just the action of an unecessary "joobsworth" with nothing better to do with his time Time we merged with Poole and cut the number of Councillors and Officials by at least 50%. Having said that, Mitchell is a fool to proceed without permission and it could cost him dear - it wont be forgotten either, should he ever come to develop the South End. The Law may be an ****, but it should be obeyed. Square Old Codger

4:00pm Wed 20 Jun 12

lenton52 says...

Would be nice to think Nick King has got enough time on his hands calling this up at the planning board when he cant be bothered to do anything about the fly tipping on land backing off from Bicknell school along Petersfield road.

The land up at Kings park has been a eyesaw for years and applaud Mr Mitchel in his decision to tidy it up against the wishes of incumbent Bournemouth council.

Maybe King's not being straight with us and wants these pieces of scrub land to exist in the area so he can rid himself of garden waste.

Well that's the best explanation i can come up with!!
Would be nice to think Nick King has got enough time on his hands calling this up at the planning board when he cant be bothered to do anything about the fly tipping on land backing off from Bicknell school along Petersfield road. The land up at Kings park has been a eyesaw for years and applaud Mr Mitchel in his decision to tidy it up against the wishes of incumbent Bournemouth council. Maybe King's not being straight with us and wants these pieces of scrub land to exist in the area so he can rid himself of garden waste. Well that's the best explanation i can come up with!! lenton52

4:12pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Bmthdad says...

pete woodley wrote:
If eddie gets away with startng early,the council will not be able to stop others,he is showing complete contempt for the laws.
Just like the Council did running roughshod over the law regarding the community building in Boscombe you mean?
This is a minor breach as the application has already been recommended for approval and the reassurances could have been requested by committee long ago. This is nothing more than a Cllr trying to get one over on Mr Mitchell, (who I am not a fan of by the way).
[quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: If eddie gets away with startng early,the council will not be able to stop others,he is showing complete contempt for the laws.[/p][/quote]Just like the Council did running roughshod over the law regarding the community building in Boscombe you mean? This is a minor breach as the application has already been recommended for approval and the reassurances could have been requested by committee long ago. This is nothing more than a Cllr trying to get one over on Mr Mitchell, (who I am not a fan of by the way). Bmthdad

4:18pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Redgolfer00 says...

harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote:
harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote:
harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote:
I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.
I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.
I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches!
I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.”
My point is that there's not much park left in Kings Park and each year it shrinks a little bit more. There really isn't the need for so many athletics/football/a


ny other type of sport pitches and a failing football club which shouldn't be there in the first place.
I think you will find the football club has been there for getting on for a century and is actually on land bequeathed it by the Cooper Dean Estate.
And sold by the football club, as it could not afford to be run properly, who would trust Mitchell, only the blind fools that come on here in support of him.
[quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.[/p][/quote]I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.[/p][/quote]I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches![/p][/quote]I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.”[/p][/quote]My point is that there's not much park left in Kings Park and each year it shrinks a little bit more. There really isn't the need for so many athletics/football/a ny other type of sport pitches and a failing football club which shouldn't be there in the first place.[/p][/quote]I think you will find the football club has been there for getting on for a century and is actually on land bequeathed it by the Cooper Dean Estate.[/p][/quote]And sold by the football club, as it could not afford to be run properly, who would trust Mitchell, only the blind fools that come on here in support of him. Redgolfer00

4:21pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Bmthdad says...

ElmerFudd wrote:
Bob49 wrote:
"and worry about the real illegal planning and back-handers that go on!"

oh dear

are you really that daft ?

You have not questioned why a club the size of Bournemouth (with it's continued debt problems) is spending £600,000 on tarmacing a car park that it DOESN'T even own.

For what ?

To stop a few boy racers, to fill in some pot holes ?

Anyone with an IQ into double figures might suggest that 'IF' a new stand and hotel is being built then would it not be far better to tarmac the carpark after all the heavy contractors vehicles have trundled backwards and forwards over it.

The whole scam stinks, and that smell only grows stronger with this sudden guff about funding being withdrawn so it has to start immediately.
quote: "oh dear are you really that daft ?"
quote: "Anyone with an IQ into double figures might suggest that 'IF' a..."

Well, quite right my IQ isn't in double fugures, BUT it's in triple figures... 159 actually, one of the highest in the country, oh, and I attained two BSc's (one with Honours), a Masters and a PhD, so please don't make childish sweeping assumptions designed to score cheap points about someone who you don't even know.
So, let's see you apologise and admit that "daft" doesn't even come into it.
And if you refuse to believe that half the planning process isn't based on back-handers and favours, then your really are living in fantasy laa-laa land.
QED
If you have evidence of this huge and ongoing "planning process" fraud, I presume you will be taking it straight to the Police?
If you have no evidence you should simply shut up, and stop making sweeping allegations.
[quote][p][bold]ElmerFudd[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: "and worry about the real illegal planning and back-handers that go on!" oh dear are you really that daft ? You have not questioned why a club the size of Bournemouth (with it's continued debt problems) is spending £600,000 on tarmacing a car park that it DOESN'T even own. For what ? To stop a few boy racers, to fill in some pot holes ? Anyone with an IQ into double figures might suggest that 'IF' a new stand and hotel is being built then would it not be far better to tarmac the carpark after all the heavy contractors vehicles have trundled backwards and forwards over it. The whole scam stinks, and that smell only grows stronger with this sudden guff about funding being withdrawn so it has to start immediately.[/p][/quote]quote: "oh dear are you really that daft ?" quote: "Anyone with an IQ into double figures might suggest that 'IF' a..." Well, quite right my IQ isn't in double fugures, BUT it's in triple figures... 159 actually, one of the highest in the country, oh, and I attained two BSc's (one with Honours), a Masters and a PhD, so please don't make childish sweeping assumptions designed to score cheap points about someone who you don't even know. So, let's see you apologise and admit that "daft" doesn't even come into it. And if you refuse to believe that half the planning process isn't based on back-handers and favours, then your really are living in fantasy laa-laa land. QED[/p][/quote]If you have evidence of this huge and ongoing "planning process" fraud, I presume you will be taking it straight to the Police? If you have no evidence you should simply shut up, and stop making sweeping allegations. Bmthdad

4:49pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Cmdr Kryll says...

Legend!

Also Mitchell in the standard Echo arms folded pose
Legend! Also Mitchell in the standard Echo arms folded pose Cmdr Kryll

5:02pm Wed 20 Jun 12

pete woodley says...

Bob 49,i dont often agree with you,but some people are really gullible over Mitchell.
Bob 49,i dont often agree with you,but some people are really gullible over Mitchell. pete woodley

5:10pm Wed 20 Jun 12

The Renegade Master says...

pete woodley wrote:
Bob 49,i dont often agree with you,but some people are really gullible over Mitchell.
I think everyone knows Mitchell is at AFCB to make money and to prop up his ailing property businesses. He is not a football man. However, if the ground returns to club ownership, the fourth stand and hotel gets built, the training pitches and car park are finished and the team get promoted, who cares if Mitchell & Demin then sell up for a tidy sum?
[quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Bob 49,i dont often agree with you,but some people are really gullible over Mitchell.[/p][/quote]I think everyone knows Mitchell is at AFCB to make money and to prop up his ailing property businesses. He is not a football man. However, if the ground returns to club ownership, the fourth stand and hotel gets built, the training pitches and car park are finished and the team get promoted, who cares if Mitchell & Demin then sell up for a tidy sum? The Renegade Master

5:11pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Sir Roland Butter says...

mysticalshoelace wrote:
harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote:
harrythered wrote:
mysticalshoelace wrote: I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.
I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.
I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches!
I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.”
My point is that there's not much park left in Kings Park and each year it shrinks a little bit more. There really isn't the need for so many athletics/football/a ny other type of sport pitches and a failing football club which shouldn't be there in the first place.
Yes there is very little green space left in Kings park that doesn't have dog turd on it.........., sorry wrong thread!!
[quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]harrythered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mysticalshoelace[/bold] wrote: I object to the insidious takeover of Kings Park by AFC Bournemouth aka Eddie Mitchell, he won't be content until he's got his greedy, greasy little paws on every patch.[/p][/quote]I think you will find the Council will still own the land and the only benefit to the club is match day parking revenue in return for the club fronting the cost of much needed improvement. Perhaps you would rather pay a little extra Council Tax and get the Council to improve it.[/p][/quote]I'd happily pay a bit more council tax to have Kings Park totally returned to green open space! The council and AFCB seem totally committed to covering it in concrete and sports pitches![/p][/quote]I don't know how old you are but sports pitches have been there for well over over 50 years, and the car park in question used to be a rubbish tip and was filled with waste, any way I thought the Park was given to the people of bournemouth for enjoyment and recreation.”[/p][/quote]My point is that there's not much park left in Kings Park and each year it shrinks a little bit more. There really isn't the need for so many athletics/football/a ny other type of sport pitches and a failing football club which shouldn't be there in the first place.[/p][/quote]Yes there is very little green space left in Kings park that doesn't have dog turd on it.........., sorry wrong thread!! Sir Roland Butter

5:23pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Afcblees says...

Bournemouth council are a bunch of overpaid tossers,potholes don't get filled the roads don't get gritted early enough,fair play to EM doing something positive the place is an eyesore,I'm sure all those that drive there cars whether it be match day or not would prefere a nice smooth surface to prevent damage to your cars etc.
Bournemouth council are a bunch of overpaid tossers,potholes don't get filled the roads don't get gritted early enough,fair play to EM doing something positive the place is an eyesore,I'm sure all those that drive there cars whether it be match day or not would prefere a nice smooth surface to prevent damage to your cars etc. Afcblees

5:24pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Afcblees says...

Bournemouth council are a bunch of overpaid tossers,potholes don't get filled the roads don't get gritted early enough,fair play to EM doing something positive the place is an eyesore,I'm sure all those that drive there cars whether it be match day or not would prefere a nice smooth surface to prevent damage to your cars etc.
Bournemouth council are a bunch of overpaid tossers,potholes don't get filled the roads don't get gritted early enough,fair play to EM doing something positive the place is an eyesore,I'm sure all those that drive there cars whether it be match day or not would prefere a nice smooth surface to prevent damage to your cars etc. Afcblees

5:30pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Bob49 says...

Oh dear, they are out in force today ... maybe it's the sunshine.

So harry, here we are, as previously posted -

"Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ?

Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden deadline on things ?"

Those are mine and there are numerous more from other posters

And to Renegade Master, a really odd one who simply makes things up to reply to - perhaps he could point out to us all where I said anything in this thread about -

"corruption in the planning department?"
Oh dear, they are out in force today ... maybe it's the sunshine. So harry, here we are, as previously posted - "Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ? Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden deadline on things ?" Those are mine and there are numerous more from other posters And to Renegade Master, a really odd one who simply makes things up to reply to - perhaps he could point out to us all where I said anything in this thread about - "corruption in the planning department?" Bob49

6:13pm Wed 20 Jun 12

matt68 says...

Mr N James wrote:
I've read alot about the guy in this fine paper. he comes across a total DI*K HEAD. and any body who supports this guy is also a DI*K HEAD ,Have a nice day all
thanks then
[quote][p][bold]Mr N James[/bold] wrote: I've read alot about the guy in this fine paper. he comes across a total DI*K HEAD. and any body who supports this guy is also a DI*K HEAD ,Have a nice day all[/p][/quote]thanks then matt68

6:21pm Wed 20 Jun 12

alasdair1967 says...

Well the work has started in earnest then on resurfacing the carpark ,the only work that has been done is the part removal of the earth bank adjacent to the new training pitches and the carpark part of the initial plans for the training pitches !
Well the work has started in earnest then on resurfacing the carpark ,the only work that has been done is the part removal of the earth bank adjacent to the new training pitches and the carpark part of the initial plans for the training pitches ! alasdair1967

6:41pm Wed 20 Jun 12

here we go says...

well done eddie, great man - not only did he save afcb from going pop but now he is tidying up a dust bowl at no expense to the council, i think the queen needs to know about this great man if gary barlow can get an obe for putting a pop concert together then eddie mitchell deserves a knighthood
well done eddie, great man - not only did he save afcb from going pop but now he is tidying up a dust bowl at no expense to the council, i think the queen needs to know about this great man if gary barlow can get an obe for putting a pop concert together then eddie mitchell deserves a knighthood here we go

6:49pm Wed 20 Jun 12

username is already in use says...

Building without granted planning happens all the time even, with large developments. People here don't understand how the system works, EM wont get in any trouble for this.
Building without granted planning happens all the time even, with large developments. People here don't understand how the system works, EM wont get in any trouble for this. username is already in use

6:54pm Wed 20 Jun 12

B'hamC'ham says...

We all know that the "car-park" is a disgrace and badly needs seeing to.

Or maybe that's just those who've visited the stadium.

So maybe not our dearly beloved councillors?
We all know that the "car-park" is a disgrace and badly needs seeing to. Or maybe that's just those who've visited the stadium. So maybe not our dearly beloved councillors? B'hamC'ham

7:27pm Wed 20 Jun 12

hugh1 says...

What harm is being done.
A new car park for free, yes please. If the words surf reef could be linked with car park the council would gladly rush to pay!
What harm is being done. A new car park for free, yes please. If the words surf reef could be linked with car park the council would gladly rush to pay! hugh1

7:53pm Wed 20 Jun 12

ashleycross says...

Lets hope that Bournemouth Council and Mr M, well known tree huggers all, have put masses of secure cycle storage in place at this car park. A proportion af about one to one car place to cycle place would be about right. Or am I confusing Bournemouth with a modern forward thinking town looking to appeal to fit healthy ecologically minded residents. I expect there will be more burger vans than secure cycle spaces.
Lets hope that Bournemouth Council and Mr M, well known tree huggers all, have put masses of secure cycle storage in place at this car park. A proportion af about one to one car place to cycle place would be about right. Or am I confusing Bournemouth with a modern forward thinking town looking to appeal to fit healthy ecologically minded residents. I expect there will be more burger vans than secure cycle spaces. ashleycross

7:56pm Wed 20 Jun 12

*Fiona* says...

John T wrote:
*Fiona* wrote:
This mans behaviour is beyond egotism. His narcissism and sense of entitlement is out of control. He has Roman Emperor Syndrome. Theres something not right about him and he shouldnt be in a leadership position. He is a liability to the football club.
By referring to Mitchell having Roman Emperor Syndrome, I assume you are likening him to Emperor Nero who fiddled while Rome burned after a fire ignited by himself to clear land for his own palatial ambitions.
Mitchell certainly knows how to fiddle and the rest, as they say, will soon be history. Nearly all the Roman Emperors got their comeuppance; and so in the not too distant future will the Seven Developments Empire.
This is probably the reason why Mitchell is wanting to rush through the 'supposed' funding.
Like with the Surf Greef, it will be the Council taxpayer who ultimately picks up the bill for this skullduggery.
Roman Emperor Syndrome-its mainly found in men who have very severe control issues.

Its similar to Little Man Syndrome.
[quote][p][bold]John T[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]*Fiona*[/bold] wrote: This mans behaviour is beyond egotism. His narcissism and sense of entitlement is out of control. He has Roman Emperor Syndrome. Theres something not right about him and he shouldnt be in a leadership position. He is a liability to the football club.[/p][/quote]By referring to Mitchell having Roman Emperor Syndrome, I assume you are likening him to Emperor Nero who fiddled while Rome burned after a fire ignited by himself to clear land for his own palatial ambitions. Mitchell certainly knows how to fiddle and the rest, as they say, will soon be history. Nearly all the Roman Emperors got their comeuppance; and so in the not too distant future will the Seven Developments Empire. This is probably the reason why Mitchell is wanting to rush through the 'supposed' funding. Like with the Surf Greef, it will be the Council taxpayer who ultimately picks up the bill for this skullduggery.[/p][/quote]Roman Emperor Syndrome-its mainly found in men who have very severe control issues. Its similar to Little Man Syndrome. *Fiona*

8:00pm Wed 20 Jun 12

sea poole says...

ElmerFudd -Priceless! Brilliant piece of commentary! Can't wait to read Bob49's response -if he begins to understand the content of what you have posted!
ElmerFudd -Priceless! Brilliant piece of commentary! Can't wait to read Bob49's response -if he begins to understand the content of what you have posted! sea poole

8:01pm Wed 20 Jun 12

The Renegade Master says...

Bob49 wrote:
Oh dear, they are out in force today ... maybe it's the sunshine.

So harry, here we are, as previously posted -

"Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ?

Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden deadline on things ?"

Those are mine and there are numerous more from other posters

And to Renegade Master, a really odd one who simply makes things up to reply to - perhaps he could point out to us all where I said anything in this thread about -

"corruption in the planning department?"
Bob49 says: "...perhaps he (The Renegade Master) could point out to us all where I said anything in this thread about - "corruption in the planning department?"
Really Bob49? Here is your quote:
"And if you refuse to believe that half the planning process isn't based on back-handers and favours, then your really are living in fantasy laa-laa land."

Bob49, Echo forum internet troll caught lying yet again. Moron.
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: Oh dear, they are out in force today ... maybe it's the sunshine. So harry, here we are, as previously posted - "Why is this cost being put through the books of the football club ? Why if the club is 'happy' to pay has it now put this sudden deadline on things ?" Those are mine and there are numerous more from other posters And to Renegade Master, a really odd one who simply makes things up to reply to - perhaps he could point out to us all where I said anything in this thread about - "corruption in the planning department?"[/p][/quote]Bob49 says: "...perhaps he (The Renegade Master) could point out to us all where I said anything in this thread about - "corruption in the planning department?" Really Bob49? Here is your quote: "And if you refuse to believe that half the planning process isn't based on back-handers and favours, then your really are living in fantasy laa-laa land." Bob49, Echo forum internet troll caught lying yet again. Moron. The Renegade Master

8:09pm Wed 20 Jun 12

pete woodley says...

But socialists are allowed to make mistakes arnt they.
But socialists are allowed to make mistakes arnt they. pete woodley

8:12pm Wed 20 Jun 12

pete woodley says...

sea poole wrote:
ElmerFudd -Priceless! Brilliant piece of commentary! Can't wait to read Bob49's response -if he begins to understand the content of what you have posted!
Its getting too complicated for me.i am going to sit this out.
[quote][p][bold]sea poole[/bold] wrote: ElmerFudd -Priceless! Brilliant piece of commentary! Can't wait to read Bob49's response -if he begins to understand the content of what you have posted![/p][/quote]Its getting too complicated for me.i am going to sit this out. pete woodley

8:25pm Wed 20 Jun 12

ElmerFudd says...

Bob49 wrote:
"As to your stupid ill-informed comment about back-hander allegations, I have raised six for investigation and, so far, five have been upheld."

dearie me

it must be All Idiots Day today as they are popping up like

Now I expect you can quote us all the names and dates to which you have raised these six "back-hander allegations". Maybe include how and when they were upheld ... and by who,

Perhaps whilst you are at it you could point out to us all what comment I made about "back-hander allegations". The time, or maybe the direct quote will do.

Just so others don't think that you are making things up as another chap on here does, quite frequently.

Oh, and your comment about "the deliberately placed typo" does seem rather an odd thing to be doing for someone who has (supposedly) "two BSc's (one with Honours), a Masters and a PhD" and an IQ of 159 (just a couple of points off the highest possible total of 161).

Anyway, I'm sure we are all looking forward to you naming those involved in your five upheld investigations so don't be too long in telling us.
Oh dear, oh dear... it must be National 'Bob Proves Himself to be a Complete Twonk" Flag Day.

So, by which ill-informed Wackypedia website did you try looking up the top quotient factor? 161 indeed! LMAO! Give me a break!
You are a real laugh, and proves that your reliance on poor information is reminiscent of an amoeba floating around looking for some mere fleck of interest in the pond in which you obviously thrive.

Kasparov, for example, has an IQ of 190 (29 points above your presumed 'limit'), and Ung-yong, the physicist, has a verified quotient of over 200, allegedly 210 at the time of measurement.

So, Mr Thicko (who's obviously a bit narked at anyone having a higher intelligence than himself), pray do tell how 200+ or the numerous recorded quotients of over 170, 180, etc., relate to your hypothesis of a maximum of 161?

As to the planning issues, please do go look them up on the Standards Board's archive, or read the minutes of the Standard's Commitee for BBC.

It really is VERY simple... but there again, 'simple' is obviously too difficult for you. Ah well, never mind.
One wonders how humans have evolved to be able to land men on the moon, whilst around us we still have examples, like Bob, of those who still sharpen sticks and grunt.
Trying to understand his 'logic' is a bit like trying to hold an intelligent conversation with a drawing pin.
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: "As to your stupid ill-informed comment about back-hander allegations, I have raised six for investigation and, so far, five have been upheld." dearie me it must be All Idiots Day today as they are popping up like Now I expect you can quote us all the names and dates to which you have raised these six "back-hander allegations". Maybe include how and when they were upheld ... and by who, Perhaps whilst you are at it you could point out to us all what comment I made about "back-hander allegations". The time, or maybe the direct quote will do. Just so others don't think that you are making things up as another chap on here does, quite frequently. Oh, and your comment about "the deliberately placed typo" does seem rather an odd thing to be doing for someone who has (supposedly) "two BSc's (one with Honours), a Masters and a PhD" and an IQ of 159 (just a couple of points off the highest possible total of 161). Anyway, I'm sure we are all looking forward to you naming those involved in your five upheld investigations so don't be too long in telling us.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, oh dear... it must be National 'Bob Proves Himself to be a Complete Twonk" Flag Day. So, by which ill-informed Wackypedia website did you try looking up the top quotient factor? 161 indeed! LMAO! Give me a break! You are a real laugh, and proves that your reliance on poor information is reminiscent of an amoeba floating around looking for some mere fleck of interest in the pond in which you obviously thrive. Kasparov, for example, has an IQ of 190 (29 points above your presumed 'limit'), and Ung-yong, the physicist, has a verified quotient of over 200, allegedly 210 at the time of measurement. So, Mr Thicko (who's obviously a bit narked at anyone having a higher intelligence than himself), pray do tell how 200+ or the numerous recorded quotients of over 170, 180, etc., relate to your hypothesis of a maximum of 161? As to the planning issues, please do go look them up on the Standards Board's archive, or read the minutes of the Standard's Commitee for BBC. It really is VERY simple... but there again, 'simple' is obviously too difficult for you. Ah well, never mind. One wonders how humans have evolved to be able to land men on the moon, whilst around us we still have examples, like Bob, of those who still sharpen sticks and grunt. Trying to understand his 'logic' [sic] is a bit like trying to hold an intelligent conversation with a drawing pin. ElmerFudd

9:18pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Roband65 says...

Backhanders to councillors surely this never occours haha !
Backhanders to councillors surely this never occours haha ! Roband65

11:09pm Wed 20 Jun 12

darkipa says...

Well done Eddie, it's about time someone done something, the trouble with the council is they want a backhander for everything these days.
Well done Eddie, it's about time someone done something, the trouble with the council is they want a backhander for everything these days. darkipa

11:20pm Wed 20 Jun 12

ragj195 says...

As a local resident I use the park daily either for a run, dog walk or just with the kids. Can I just say that I'm fed up not only with the dogs rolling around in a 1ft deep puddle on their way home from a walk but also with the surface of the car park not being suitable for my kids to scooter across!

The whole area must be a health and safety hazard as three times they have tried to scooter across it (despite my warnings) only to hit an oversized stone resulting in the unavoidable catapult!

I would go the other way but the dogs keep looking through the fence at the training pitches wondering what's happened to their toilet. Hope they don't leave the gates open!
As a local resident I use the park daily either for a run, dog walk or just with the kids. Can I just say that I'm fed up not only with the dogs rolling around in a 1ft deep puddle on their way home from a walk but also with the surface of the car park not being suitable for my kids to scooter across! The whole area must be a health and safety hazard as three times they have tried to scooter across it (despite my warnings) only to hit an oversized stone resulting in the unavoidable catapult! I would go the other way but the dogs keep looking through the fence at the training pitches wondering what's happened to their toilet. Hope they don't leave the gates open! ragj195

8:29am Thu 21 Jun 12

The Renegade Master says...

The Echo used to be really hot on kicking trolls off their site. That seems not to be the case since the new Editor took over.
Perhaps it's time they reviewed their policy and rid this site of people like Bob49 who insults everyone and talks utter tripe every time he comes on here.
The Echo used to be really hot on kicking trolls off their site. That seems not to be the case since the new Editor took over. Perhaps it's time they reviewed their policy and rid this site of people like Bob49 who insults everyone and talks utter tripe every time he comes on here. The Renegade Master

8:41am Thu 21 Jun 12

bang on this then says...

Its a good job Harry cant read these sad lavatorial comments from 11.29 .

Mr Mitchell you are a great GENTLEMAN a credit to the town,

IGNORE THE TAD TROLL.
Its a good job Harry cant read these sad lavatorial comments from 11.29 . Mr Mitchell you are a great GENTLEMAN a credit to the town, IGNORE THE TAD TROLL. bang on this then

12:47pm Thu 21 Jun 12

bicameral says...

The 'Lorry Park' area is not owned by the football club, and if the club wants to work on any one elses property then proper consent needs to be obtained. EM wants the Car Park tidy to fit with the new stand / hotel complex. This all seems obvioous. What i can't understand is that with a 'billionaire' part owning the club why dont they buy the stadium. £3.5m (ish) is nothing to a billionaire, then the club is building on its own property - not some one elses.
The 'Lorry Park' area is not owned by the football club, and if the club wants to work on any one elses property then proper consent needs to be obtained. EM wants the Car Park tidy to fit with the new stand / hotel complex. This all seems obvioous. What i can't understand is that with a 'billionaire' part owning the club why dont they buy the stadium. £3.5m (ish) is nothing to a billionaire, then the club is building on its own property - not some one elses. bicameral

1:09pm Thu 21 Jun 12

bicameral says...

Radj195 do you really live in Thistlebarrow Road?
Radj195 do you really live in Thistlebarrow Road? bicameral

1:10pm Thu 21 Jun 12

ragj195 says...

bicameral wrote:
Radj195 do you really live in Thistlebarrow Road?
Sure do.
[quote][p][bold]bicameral[/bold] wrote: Radj195 do you really live in Thistlebarrow Road?[/p][/quote]Sure do. ragj195

1:11pm Thu 21 Jun 12

bicameral says...

well go outside now i will be there in 2 minutes to say hi
well go outside now i will be there in 2 minutes to say hi bicameral

1:19pm Thu 21 Jun 12

ragj195 says...

bicameral wrote:
well go outside now i will be there in 2 minutes to say hi
Spooky! I won't say the number just in case some nutcase on here wants to pop over but I'm the guy with the pug and the boxer dogs.
[quote][p][bold]bicameral[/bold] wrote: well go outside now i will be there in 2 minutes to say hi[/p][/quote]Spooky! I won't say the number just in case some nutcase on here wants to pop over but I'm the guy with the pug and the boxer dogs. ragj195

1:22pm Thu 21 Jun 12

bicameral says...

I guessed that i went round but you were not there i will try again now
I guessed that i went round but you were not there i will try again now bicameral

1:56pm Thu 21 Jun 12

CourtOffside says...

Anyway.

Is the work still going on, or did Eddie just send a couple of JCBs round to try and force the issue somewhat?
Anyway. Is the work still going on, or did Eddie just send a couple of JCBs round to try and force the issue somewhat? CourtOffside

3:29pm Thu 21 Jun 12

ragj195 says...

CourtOffside wrote:
Anyway.

Is the work still going on, or did Eddie just send a couple of JCBs round to try and force the issue somewhat?
They're removing the 4ft high dirt mound that runs between the car park and the training pitches as we type. Will probably find a few matresses while they're at it.
[quote][p][bold]CourtOffside[/bold] wrote: Anyway. Is the work still going on, or did Eddie just send a couple of JCBs round to try and force the issue somewhat?[/p][/quote]They're removing the 4ft high dirt mound that runs between the car park and the training pitches as we type. Will probably find a few matresses while they're at it. ragj195

3:30pm Thu 21 Jun 12

Sam Shepherd says...

Good afternoon all

The eagle-eyed among you will have noticed that I've removed several comments from this thread.
If you see similar problems developing on any of our stories, please don't wade in - use the report this post button to let us know and we can tackle the issue before it becomes a 30 comment long mud-slinger. Many thanks
Good afternoon all The eagle-eyed among you will have noticed that I've removed several comments from this thread. If you see similar problems developing on any of our stories, please don't wade in - use the report this post button to let us know and we can tackle the issue before it becomes a 30 comment long mud-slinger. Many thanks Sam Shepherd

3:37pm Thu 21 Jun 12

bicameral says...

I think they are intending to remove the dirt mounds to stop the training pitches flooding.

i am not sure where they will fling the mud to though? (Given the mud belongs to the park?)
I think they are intending to remove the dirt mounds to stop the training pitches flooding. i am not sure where they will fling the mud to though? (Given the mud belongs to the park?) bicameral

3:53pm Thu 21 Jun 12

ragj195 says...

bicameral wrote:
I think they are intending to remove the dirt mounds to stop the training pitches flooding.

i am not sure where they will fling the mud to though? (Given the mud belongs to the park?)
I think there is going to be a tarmc path running parallel to the car park where the mound is.

As for the mud, that was being loaded onto a lorry so it looks like it's being put into "storage".
[quote][p][bold]bicameral[/bold] wrote: I think they are intending to remove the dirt mounds to stop the training pitches flooding. i am not sure where they will fling the mud to though? (Given the mud belongs to the park?)[/p][/quote]I think there is going to be a tarmc path running parallel to the car park where the mound is. As for the mud, that was being loaded onto a lorry so it looks like it's being put into "storage". ragj195

4:25pm Thu 21 Jun 12

ElmerFudd says...

Sam Shepherd wrote:
Good afternoon all

The eagle-eyed among you will have noticed that I've removed several comments from this thread.
If you see similar problems developing on any of our stories, please don't wade in - use the report this post button to let us know and we can tackle the issue before it becomes a 30 comment long mud-slinger. Many thanks
oh Sam, you are a bit of a spoilsport. :)

However, maybe if the trolling was stopped in the first place, and the accusatory and unsubstantiated comments aimed at newcomers to the forum were monitored better, it wouldn't encourage to stand up for themselves and defend against their accusers.
[quote][p][bold]Sam Shepherd[/bold] wrote: Good afternoon all The eagle-eyed among you will have noticed that I've removed several comments from this thread. If you see similar problems developing on any of our stories, please don't wade in - use the report this post button to let us know and we can tackle the issue before it becomes a 30 comment long mud-slinger. Many thanks[/p][/quote]oh Sam, you are a bit of a spoilsport. :) However, maybe if the trolling was stopped in the first place, and the accusatory and unsubstantiated comments aimed at newcomers to the forum were monitored better, it wouldn't encourage to stand up for themselves and defend against their accusers. ElmerFudd

5:03pm Thu 21 Jun 12

Sam Shepherd says...

ElmerFudd wrote:
Sam Shepherd wrote:
Good afternoon all

The eagle-eyed among you will have noticed that I've removed several comments from this thread.
If you see similar problems developing on any of our stories, please don't wade in - use the report this post button to let us know and we can tackle the issue before it becomes a 30 comment long mud-slinger. Many thanks
oh Sam, you are a bit of a spoilsport. :)

However, maybe if the trolling was stopped in the first place, and the accusatory and unsubstantiated comments aimed at newcomers to the forum were monitored better, it wouldn't encourage to stand up for themselves and defend against their accusers.
Unfortunately, we're a pre-moderated site, so we can't monitor, I'm afraid. Instead we have to rely on people like you to tell us when it's happening instead of joining in ;)
[quote][p][bold]ElmerFudd[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sam Shepherd[/bold] wrote: Good afternoon all The eagle-eyed among you will have noticed that I've removed several comments from this thread. If you see similar problems developing on any of our stories, please don't wade in - use the report this post button to let us know and we can tackle the issue before it becomes a 30 comment long mud-slinger. Many thanks[/p][/quote]oh Sam, you are a bit of a spoilsport. :) However, maybe if the trolling was stopped in the first place, and the accusatory and unsubstantiated comments aimed at newcomers to the forum were monitored better, it wouldn't encourage to stand up for themselves and defend against their accusers.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately, we're a pre-moderated site, so we can't monitor, I'm afraid. Instead we have to rely on people like you to tell us when it's happening instead of joining in ;) Sam Shepherd

10:26pm Thu 21 Jun 12

*Fiona* says...

bang on this then wrote:
Its a good job Harry cant read these sad lavatorial comments from 11.29 .

Mr Mitchell you are a great GENTLEMAN a credit to the town,

IGNORE THE TAD TROLL.
Im not a troll bang on the money.

But I admit I do tend to have very strong opinions on destructive narcissists because of the harm they do to others

We live in a dysfunctional screwed up world and I feel that by speaking out and speaking the truth,possibly raising conciousness by protesting against bad people/ toxic organizations etc
I might possibly be able to do some good in this universe.

Thanks
[quote][p][bold]bang on this then[/bold] wrote: Its a good job Harry cant read these sad lavatorial comments from 11.29 . Mr Mitchell you are a great GENTLEMAN a credit to the town, IGNORE THE TAD TROLL.[/p][/quote]Im not a troll bang on the money. But I admit I do tend to have very strong opinions on destructive narcissists because of the harm they do to others We live in a dysfunctional screwed up world and I feel that by speaking out and speaking the truth,possibly raising conciousness by protesting against bad people/ toxic organizations etc I might possibly be able to do some good in this universe. Thanks *Fiona*

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree