This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.
Tom Dargie, who served as the (obviously paid) ecologist on the Trump Menie development, which has destroyed a significant mobile dune system, to the point where its SSSI has been removed. Just a tad hypocritical.
AdamI absolutely agree that he's somewhat tarred by his previous association and pretty sure he rues the day that he was retained by Trump to provide professional advice. In fact I seem to recall him saying that Trump misrepresented the advice he had given at the planning meeting.I suggest therefore that he was more "unfortunate" in his choice of client rather than being a hypocrite. And in fairness to Dargie, if you recall at the time, Trump was known in this country as being a colourful wealthy American businessman and wasn't at that point the toxic figure (to some) that he has become. It should also be said that other solid reputable firms acted for Trump on his Aberdeen development.Niall
AdrianWe really should meet up again for a drink and then we can compare "war stories" !JeffIf you thought Balmedie was a non-starter for environmental reasons then I'm puzzled how you could avoid coming to the same conclusion on Embo. But that aside, you should realise that in this country the planning permission "goes with the property" and not the applicant. In other words if Mike Keiser and Todd Warnock had got their planning permission first time round then they would have been at liberty to sell the ground lease (subject to the wording in the ground lease), complete with planning permission, to Donald Trump or anyone else they wished to. That goes for any planning application/consent. Consequently it is the merit of the application that is considered and not the merit of the applicant, which is entirely logical when you think about it.That said, I tend to think the damage has already been done. What the first application did and this second application continues to do is unite the anti-golf lobby. You may think the country is 100% full of golf nuts but there is in fact a growing contingent of people who consider the sport to be elitist; sexist; and bad for the environment amongst other things. This proposed development just provides grist to the mill. So while at the end of the day we might end up with another lovely high-end golf development for mainly overseas golfers to play, golf in this country will have to fight that little bit harder to convince the non-golfing community that golf actually can be good for the environment. Just saying.Niall