Jump to content

Residents object to Derbyhaven development.


Max Power

Recommended Posts

On 6/23/2023 at 6:17 PM, Asthehills said:

If they do they should sell the clubs, scrap the membership fee and save for a house deposit like the rest of us had to.

If people paid social housing tenants as much to look after their aging loved ones as they do bankers to look after their money, we'd be able to.

 

Twat.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Banker said:

Latest developments, looks like dandara will submit revised plans to actually meet planning requirements!

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/castletown-golf-course-owner-presses-case-for-demolition-of-hotel/

Whatever they submit will be objected to by Derbyhaven residents. As their spokesman Tim Cullen said, we can't have our biosphere status threatened by building on a greenfield site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Twitch said:

Whatever they submit will be objected to by Derbyhaven residents. As their spokesman Tim Cullen said, we can't have our biosphere status threatened by building on a greenfield site.

Even though a building has been on the site for c100 years!!

it’s not designated green field, it has outline planning but what dandara wants is way outside guidelines 

Edited by Banker
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Banker said:

Latest developments, looks like dandara will submit revised plans to actually meet planning requirements!

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/castletown-golf-course-owner-presses-case-for-demolition-of-hotel/

A bit disingenuous of Dandara, the quotes in the article, the only reason planning has taken so long and been controversial is their attempts to really hit the big bucks with a development of apartments, which would undoubtedly have been eye watering in cost, and only available to those with bottomless pockets. Had they bought the site with an intention to build what was outline approved at the time, none of this would be occurring. If we were truly biosphere and wildlife orientated, this development would be out of the question in any case, as what was acceptable historically does not really fit with the areas status as an ASSI. I made the point earlier they bought the site with consent for X, they knew they wanted to build Y for a stunning bottom line, the prevarications and delays are of their own making.

I am not connected in any way with Derbyhaven or its residents, but sites like the Fort Island one are few and far between and that should be maintained.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...