[jeffwarne]

Jeff,


What is ironic is that one of the main opponents to the development at Coul Links was Trump's environmental expert at Aberdeen which he backed.

I'm guessing he's been paid by Trump on both counts

[David_Tepper]

The battle lines are drawn:

http://www.northern-times.co.uk/News/Coul-row-hots-up-22122017.htm

The funny thing is, a whole new dunesland/links ecosystem is building up on the north side of the Dornoch Firth (south of the Dornoch caravan park) with sand that I think is being washed down from the coastline up by Golspie. Who knows, maybe someone will want to build a course there in another 20 or 30 years (or maybe that land will be designated an SSSI).    

[Daryl David]

A question for David and others in the know. If Vegas had a line, what would be the odds for getting this project done?

[John Connolly]

I’m afraid I didn’t find Mr Warnock’s explication any more compelling than any previous material.
Scotland still has more than enough golf courses as it is.
Regards,
Mr M Bonnar.

Hey, Marty, could please also tell us what the best color is? Thanks.

[Marty Bonnar]

I’m afraid I didn’t find Mr Warnock’s explication any more compelling than any previous material.
Scotland still has more than enough golf courses as it is.
Regards,
Mr M Bonnar.

Hey, Marty, could please also tell us what the best color is? Thanks.

No, but the correct spelling is coloUr. You’re welcome.

[Joe Schackman]

The Verge has their own piece on the potential environmental impact of Coul Links. And how that weighs against potential economic benefit.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/16/16892904/not-coul-links-scotland-golf-course-mike-keiser-conservation

[David_Tepper]

Joe S. -

Thanks for the link.

DT

[Ian Mackenzie]

I've been lately curious to know what exactly a "fonseca fly" actually is...
Is it a gnat, a pest....is it a valuable part of the ecosystem?


This article is better than most in that it does actually raise the issue of protecting a fly as a priority over economic development.


So, I Googled "Fonseca" and, I must admit, I was surprised by what I found:


https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fonseca


Sounds like that is exactly what is going on here....


 

[Jon Wiggett]

The Verge has their own piece on the potential environmental impact of Coul Links. And how that weighs against potential economic benefit.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/16/16892904/not-coul-links-scotland-golf-course-mike-keiser-conservation

Just for clarity Tom Dargie as a paid environmental expert actually backed the Trump course. He is also the main man behind the 'notcoul' group. Also, have they not also found said rare fly up the coastline going north (Helmsdale, Wick, etc.)? An interesting piece but obvious where the bias lies.


Jon

[Ian Mackenzie]

The Verge has their own piece on the potential environmental impact of Coul Links. And how that weighs against potential economic benefit.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/16/16892904/not-coul-links-scotland-golf-course-mike-keiser-conservation

Just for clarity Tom Dargie as a paid environmental expert actually backed the Trump course. He is also the main man behind the 'notcoul' group. Also, have they not also found said rare fly up the coastline going north (Helmsdale, Wick, etc.)? An interesting piece but obvious where the bias lies.


Jon

For those interested in seeing the two viewpoints expressed online:


The detractors: www.notcoul.com


The proponents/rebuttal: https://www.coullinks.co.uk/not-coul-not-correct


And, for those who want to check for updates on the project in general, this site is helpful as it aggregates all publications and provides dates and links:


https://www.coullinksgolf.com/

[Jon Wiggett]

The Verge has their own piece on the potential environmental impact of Coul Links. And how that weighs against potential economic benefit.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/16/16892904/not-coul-links-scotland-golf-course-mike-keiser-conservation

Just for clarity Tom Dargie as a paid environmental expert actually backed the Trump course. He is also the main man behind the 'notcoul' group. Also, have they not also found said rare fly up the coastline going north (Helmsdale, Wick, etc.)? An interesting piece but obvious where the bias lies.


Jon

For those interested in seeing the two viewpoints expressed online:


The detractors: www.notcoul.com


The proponents/rebuttal: https://www.coullinks.co.uk/not-coul-not-correct


And, for those who want to check for updates on the project in general, this site is helpful as it aggregates all publications and provides dates and links:


https://www.coullinksgolf.com/

Ian,


it would be nice to read an article by a journalist who was not obviously pushing one side or the other. Whilst it is to be expected that developers will present things in a way that is favourable to their plans it is extremely sad that the opponents made up of supposed expert bodies and individuals put forward arguments that are so void of facts as to not stand up to even the most cursory of examination.


Jon

[Ian Mackenzie]

Jon-


Amen...we are in agreement!!
Fair and balanced journalism is rare these days, especially here in the US.


My take from afar is that the coverage of this hot issue is extremely partisan.
It’s yet another “carpet-bagging” American (or other) ruining the environment vs. economic development and supposed progress. This has been playing out globally for years.


My view now is the same as it was when this thread started:


Let the locals decide. It’s their town, the land is owned locally, and the jobs will impact them the most.
If the locals value the fly over the potential jobs and revenues, then so be it.


Cheers,
Ian

[David_Tepper]

To be fair to Mr. Dargie, he does claim in the most recent article that he advised against the Trump Aberdeen project, even though he was a paid consultant on the project.

"Dargie is no stranger to Scottish golf courses planned by American billionaires. He was employed by Trump to produce an ecology report on the dune-straddling course at Menie. He concluded that Trump’s course would adversely impact biodiversity in the area, but he thought that a portion of the habitat would also see a small net benefit. At a public inquiry, Trump announced that Dargie was “a big fan” of the project — a claim Dargie says he found “jaw-dropping.” “They knew from the outset, I told them, ‘I am against this development, please do not develop in the dunes,’” he tells me."

[Jon Wiggett]

Ian,


wouldn't it be nice


Just to be clear the vast majority of locals are in favour of the project going ahead and the vast majority of objectors are not local even to the Highlands many coming from outside of Scotland.

David,


that's exactly my point. Yes, Mr. Dargie was an environmental expert for Trump at Menie and yes he did object to the project once he was no longer part of it but his report was very much in favour of the Menie project going ahead so on paper he was more 'big fan' than 'against'. Balanced journalism would have picked up on this in my opinion. If Mr. Dargie was always against developing the dunes at Menie why did he produce a report backing their development?


Jon

[Sean_A]

Planning regulation largely over-rides opinion polls  I am assuming the presumtion in this case is against development, but not necessarily.  This application will come down to a heated planning committee meeting.  Much will depend on how well member supporters and detractors "network" and the mood of the room.  Of course...the officer reco will be important as well....assuming there is one.  I have seen applications which should never have earned approval get the OK based on the mood of the room and how well the officer (usually very matter of fact as it is no skin off their nose either way) and other public speakers present their case.  This is when the direct member can be hugely important.  Our Council, on occassion, has spoon fed the local member on his public presentation....   There is also something to be said for appeal....there are many councils that do not wish to be caught in appeals because it costs money and man-hours.  All these cases are complicated, but often come down to the same ingredients....sometimes unseen and unwritten.   

Do they have officer recommendation for this kind of stuff in Scotland? 

Ciao

[Jon Wiggett]

Sean,


though there is the planning officer's recommendation here in Scotland the planning process is different to that in England. Opinion polls do not affect the vote but LOCAL opinion does which is overwhelmingly in favour of the project. I would be surprised if it does not get permission.


Jon

[Ian Mackenzie]

[quote author=Jon Wiggett link=topic=62771.msg1561307#msg1561307 date=1516177989

David,


that's exactly my point. Yes, Mr. Dargie was an environmental expert for Trump at Menie and yes he did object to the project once he was no longer part of it but his report was very much in favour of the Menie project going ahead so on paper he was more 'big fan' than 'against'. Balanced journalism would have picked up on this in my opinion. If Mr. Dargie was always against developing the dunes at Menie why did he produce a report backing their development?


Jon



Jon,


This is complete conjecture and nothing but a guess, but I would be not at all surprised if:


1. Mr. Dargie made a proposal to the Trump Org for...let’s say...25,000 pounds to produce an enviornmental report.
2. The report was used as ammunition to seek project approval.
3. The project was approved.
4. Mr. Dargie submitted an invoice.
5. Oh my God, he was ignored by Trump sons.
6. He resubmits invoice.
7. He is sent 5,000 pounds and told to piss off or he will be sued and that he should be thankful that he was allowed the opportunity to be associated with the project.


Either that or he is a shameless opportunist who now has such a guilty conscious over getting used by the Trumps that he is now seeing Coul through some new corrective lens....;-)...and he seeks to soothe his own bruised reputation.


How can someone really call themselves an environmentalist after putting his name behind Trump Aberdeen? Everyone who comes in contact with Trump is permanently stained. Mr. Dargie is trying desperately to wash that away at Coul.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Oops

[Niall C]

Sean
 
For smaller applications planning officers have delegated powers to decide them. Where it is technically a major application, and this is for several reasons, then it needs to be decided at Committee. I’m not sure whether the planning officer is required to give a recommendation in his report to Committee but then I’ve never heard of one who hasn’t.
 
That said you are right to say that this is more likely to be a political decision reflecting local councillors own interests rather than one based on policy. I would imagine the local Councillors, and they generally are the only ones that matter given their colleagues tend to defer to them on local matters, would have had their ears bent by the developers and various supporters and possibly some groups against the development and will have a view one way or the other going into the meeting.
 
My interpretation of the “facts” from afar are that the local Councillors are on board to approve the scheme, and while Scottish Ministers could then call it in, it’s probably a good bet that they are unlikely to do that given their track record at Balmedie and at Dunblane.
 
Niall

[Adrian_Stiff]

Sean,


though there is the planning officer's recommendation here in Scotland the planning process is different to that in England. Opinion polls do not affect the vote but LOCAL opinion does which is overwhelmingly in favour of the project. I would be surprised if it does not get permission.


Jon

That's interesting that local opinion counts in Scotland in England it is purely about ticking boxes, if you tick them local opinion means absolutely zero. People that make comments normally go 'off the point and quote hearsay or nonfact', you really have to raise an objection that is going to conflict with a policy. I would say getting the parish council onside is worth it's weight in gold but that's England.

[Niall C]

Adrian
 
The vast majority of planning applications will be decided in line with policy. It is only the contentious and emotive applications that tend to go against policy. By that I mean applications like Trump at Balmedie and Judy Murray at Dunblane that I referenced earlier. And while I wouldn’t compare Donald Trump to Mike Keiser (or indeed Judy Murray) directly, they all basically are playing the same game in how they are going about getting planning permission which is give us consent or we’ll take our ball away.
 
Niall

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian
 
The vast majority of planning applications will be decided in line with policy. It is only the contentious and emotive applications that tend to go against policy. By that I mean applications like Trump at Balmedie and Judy Murray at Dunblane that I referenced earlier. And while I wouldn’t compare Donald Trump to Mike Keiser (or indeed Judy Murray) directly, they all basically are playing the same game in how they are going about getting planning permission which is give us consent or we’ll take our ball away.
 
Niall

In fairness to those three, that approach is probably the only way to get things through if you are low on box ticking.

[Jon Wiggett]

Sean,


though there is the planning officer's recommendation here in Scotland the planning process is different to that in England. Opinion polls do not affect the vote but LOCAL opinion does which is overwhelmingly in favour of the project. I would be surprised if it does not get permission.


Jon

That's interesting that local opinion counts in Scotland in England it is purely about ticking boxes, if you tick them local opinion means absolutely zero. People that make comments normally go 'off the point and quote hearsay or nonfact', you really have to raise an objection that is going to conflict with a policy. I would say getting the parish council onside is worth it's weight in gold but that's England.

Adrian,


I am confused in that you say in England it is purely a box ticking exercise meaning local opinion is not important but then say getting the Parish Council onside is worth it's weight in gold As Niall says most projects are decided by the planning officer's discretion including some golf ones but big projects are usually decided by committee where the planning officer gives an opinion. In the latter case any local councillor would be foolish not to take local opinion into account especially when it is overwhelming which it is in this case.


Jon

[Adrian_Stiff]

Jon - Local opinion I thought your were meaning the locals could have their say. In England you have the right for any person to comment on a planning application. You can do that regardless of what country you live in, so our law is, if you live in New Zealand you can object to someone extending their house. Usually people mess it up and say things irrelevant, occasionally someone can highlight a breach of planning policy or find some genuine case law from appeals, which is exactly what a good planning consultant will do.


The steps in English planning law are that once an application is received it is made public and it goes out for consultation, perhaps to as many as 20 different bodies, one of whom is the parish council. The consultants are asked to give their opinion on the proposal and note the affect and a possible way of mitigation if any. The Parish council is important because they understand to some degree planning law and maybe case law and won't often object even if they don't like something if they think their objection cannot be sustained under a minister, sometimes they might just say 'No comment' often this means they are uneasy but know they are going to lose. Getting support from a Parish council for something more problematic and perhaps with 'unticked boxes' is what is worth it's weight in gold. 200 local people having a whine and moan is not worth much if the box is ticked.


Primarily though the most important aspect is to tick the box then they can't refuse and that is why so many more applications are dealt with by delegated powers and even some very big ones now.


I am quoting how it is in England though so, if you say it is different in Scotland I will believe you.

[Sean_A]

The two planning systems are VERY similar.  Here is the thing...it is not as if "local opinion" is accurately polled or measured.  So far as I am concerned, when folks talk about strong local opinion it is hearsay.  Local opinion is "expressed" in local councils and during the Planning Meetings...hence my mood of the room comment.  It is unwise to assume the loudest folks represent the most people.  Usually, it will take something very emotive to go against officer recommendation...or if it is a grey area (a case such as this one) where officer recommendation is (will be) weighted by interpretation (which again...this is when a local authority member can really change the game).  Still, members normally want to support their officers...as many members are clueless and/or don't give a shit either way.

It has come to the point now where a lot of Councils request their local authority member to call in applications, even if it is one house!  This process essentially takes some power out of officer hands where decision-making becomes less predictable because members can be influenced by emotive issues.  It is incredibly important how assertive parish councils and local authority members are and how well they work together. 

I think this application will pass just because of what has already happened, but you never know 

Adrian

As the Clerk for our parish, it is very, very rare for the Council to back a planning application because I very, very rarely recommend the Council to do so.  Most of the time it is a no objections jobbie (try to stay neutral if possible) with a few issues hopefully considered for conditions of approval.  Because you are right, it can be very difficult for a parish council to come up reasons to object based on planning regulation.  Most of the time cllrs go off on emotive reasons or try to look for technical reasons...which rarely works because the local authority takes care of technical aspects.  My advice to them is represent themselves in replying to the consultation because that is not really where the Council should be coming from.  Of course, cllrs need to be careful because they are meant to attend meetings with an open mind to their decision-making.  So making public declarations prior to a council meeting is unwise to say the least 

Once in a while our council digs in if it feels something is amiss and we will spend serious money to engage barristers because barrister opinion can stop local authorities in their tracks and get them to re-examine the issues at hand.  BUT...this approach takes a lot of work on the part of the Clerk and cllrs so it is fairly rare.  Nearly 20% of our precept is budgeted for legal fees (read money to fight planning applications)!  Things will change once the Neighbourhood Plan is approved...the parish council will have more power in planning and seek further power with plan reviews.  It will take time, but localism will become much more of a force. 

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()