Whats going on in the field next to the castle?

[Theresa Green]

Human Excrement
Hospital Waste
Toxic Chemicals
Lard
Wayfarer Insoles
Ipcress Files
Cressida Dick
Water Cress
Sea Shanties
Panties
Padded Cells
Amoeba
Omega
Fatty Acids
Barney Rubble
The Rubettes

Did I miss anything out? …..

 

[tek-monkey]

Did I miss anything out? …..

Golf?

 

[gilbert grape]

Here?

Newport Rd · Stafford

Stafford

maps.app.goo.gl

Yes. The scene of much dumping and going!

 

[Withnail]

Did I miss anything out? …..

It doesn't really matter that Luddington Golf inc are a bunch of Cowboys...

because...

... as @Lucy will inform you... 'we' didn't want an 18 hole golf course anyway.

So that's all right then? Yes?

In the meantime, boundary hedgerows and heritage trees have been trashed, crucial oasis ponds have been filled in, literal shit - and i mean untreated sewage, like literally shit - has been dumped upon the remains, and we have been left with a legacy of this scorched earth, because of the decision, by the management of this golf club, to hire Luddington to create for them something for which they are not willing to take the blame for.

And for some reason i'm some sort of c**t for pointing this out.

 

[Lucy]

It's all my fault is it? I'll add it to the list.

There's a load of houses been built on the land earmarked for the golf course, so make of that what you will. Perhaps that's to do with Lord Stafford, as it's his land, but I'll add it to the list too if you like.

 

[tek-monkey]

It's all my fault is it? I'll add it to the list.

There's a load of houses been built on the land earmarked for the golf course, so make of that what you will. Perhaps that's to do with Lord Stafford, as it's is land, but I'll add it to the list too if you like.

I don't see how it's your fault personally, but surely it is the golf club who are at fault here if they hired this company and did nothing to rein them in?

 

[Lucy]

The golf club was run by volunteers, it was a members club which is the way many sporting clubs run. It wasn't sustainable in that format. A private company came in to offer to run and secure the future of the club. They weren't hired by anyone, they took over the club. This happened in 2006 and my comeback would be that if planning permission had been allowed at that point we'd have never got into this situation. I don't agree with how they went about what they did, and they are no longer owners of the golf club. The land was always earmarked for housing and is now being built on with aplomb by Lord Stafford's associates. An ancient hedgerow on the golf course was ripped down by the housing developers in Spring.

 

[tek-monkey]

The golf club was run by volunteers, it was a members club which is the way many sporting clubs run. It wasn't sustainable in that format. A private company came in to offer to run and secure the future of the club. They weren't hired by anyone, they took over the club. This happened in 2006 and my comeback would be that if planning permission had been allowed at that point we'd have never got into this situation. I don't agree with how they went about what they did, and they are no longer owners of the golf club. The land was always earmarked for housing and is now being built on with aplomb by Lord Stafford's associates. An ancient hedgerow on the golf course was ripped down by the housing developers in Spring.

So the golf club gave their land to a private firm, who trashed it so they could get housing permitted? If planning permission wasn't already agreed that was always a possibility.

 

[Lucy]

Nope. The land didn't belong to the golf club. We leased the land the course is on on a 25 year lease from Lord Stafford. The land that has been trashed wasn't anything to do with the golf club. Luddington leased this directly from Lord Stafford. The housing has nothing to do with Luddington as, as far as I understand, they gave the land back to LS.

 

[tek-monkey]

So why have the housing developers ripped down a hedgreow on the golf club land if the place is nothing to do with them? Or are you saying Lord Stafford is preparing the land currently leased by the golf club for more houses once the lease ends? Maybe he'll do a rugby club deal and stick a golf club in a bird sanctuary somewhere so he can get it back early?

 

[kyoto49]

The golf club was run by volunteers, it was a members club which is the way many sporting clubs run. It wasn't sustainable in that format. A private company came in to offer to run and secure the future of the club. They weren't hired by anyone, they took over the club. This happened in 2006 and my comeback would be that if planning permission had been allowed at that point we'd have never got into this situation. I don't agree with how they went about what they did, and they are no longer owners of the golf club. The land was always earmarked for housing and is now being built on with aplomb by Lord Stafford's associates. An ancient hedgerow on the golf course was ripped down by the housing developers in Spring.

So many ancient trees and hedges have been destroyed, and unnecessarily in most cases. Why the protection of hedges and trees can't be enshrined in planning permission outrages me tbh. Does the greed of developers have no limits? This was that housing estate on my recent walk. Shameful environmental damage to the hedges

 

[kyoto49]

Nope. The land didn't belong to the golf club. We leased the land the course is on on a 25 year lease from Lord Stafford. The land that has been trashed wasn't anything to do with the golf club. Luddington leased this directly from Lord Stafford. The housing has nothing to do with Luddington as, as far as I understand, they gave the land back to LS.

I hope karma gets this bloke for his greed and moral vacuousness. Inherited privilege in action and never for positive reasons

 

[Gramaisc]

Pulling out hedgerows that were not 'part of the plan', cutting down trees that were 'protected', etc. - they are just an acceptable way to proceed - sometimes a token payment may be made for the purposes of appearance, but that will be more than recouped in the end deal.

As with so many things, the law is different for different people...

 

[Lucy]

So why have the housing developers ripped down a hedgreow on the golf club land if the place is nothing to do with them? Or are you saying Lord Stafford is preparing the land currently leased by the golf club for more houses once the lease ends? Maybe he'll do a rugby club deal and stick a golf club in a bird sanctuary somewhere so he can get it back early?

I'm not saying that, but it's always been a possibility. Here's a picture. The land marked in red is having houses built on it. This land is not leased by the golf club otherwise there wouldn't be houses being built on it. The hedge in yellow is the one that was ripped out.

 

[Withnail]

It's all my fault is it? I'll add it to the list.

There's a load of houses been built on the land earmarked for the golf course, so make of that what you will. Perhaps that's to do with Lord Stafford, as it's his land, but I'll add it to the list too if you like.

My memory is shaky, i don't remember blaming you personally for any of it, let alone all of it - perhaps you would like to show me where i have done so?

You seem to be keen to continue what must be a self-appointed role as apologist for the sorry saga though, so go you!

There are no houses being built on land earmarked for the golf course, so i will make nothing of that. The land ^marked in red is below the land that would have linked the links (the way in to the field above was made, by dumping loads of mangled concrete, just before all works stopped), so i don't know if you are being disingenuous but will give you the benefit of the doubt.

The only reason i was pissed off with you personally, given that you have obviously taken it personally, was the way you went on the defensive about it. There has been what amounts to an environmental crime committed - what's going on in the fields around the castle? well a fecking environmental crime is going on in the fields around the castle - and your response? Yeah, f**k all that, we didn't want an 18 hole course anyway.

You can surely see why that might grate, what?

 

[pop80_uk]

Nope. The land didn't belong to the golf club. We leased the land the course is on on a 25 year lease from Lord Stafford. The land that has been trashed wasn't anything to do with the golf club. Luddington leased this directly from Lord Stafford. The housing has nothing to do with Luddington as, as far as I understand, they gave the land back to LS.

I have read all the replies with interest and have a few of questions out of sheer interest (no fingers pointed, just interested)

1) You mentioned the golf course is on a 25 year? when is that up? will it be renewed?

2) So Luddington leased the land, and then proceeded to trash it, and fill it with waste and all sorts. This went on for some time, and surely breached the lease conditions for the land? Do you know if they were financially punished?

3) I assume the land handed back (the trashed bit) is completely useless and worthless. You could not build on it now, its 90% basically a landfill site now, so would need an incredible amount of ground work to become anything. So basically what we are left with is a mess next to our Castle site and damage to the local environment, and someone somewhere made a lot of money.

4) What was the contractual arrangement between Luddington and the Golf course (as I assume they were expecting a new extended course and surely must have had some financial investment in the site or organisation to carry out the works?

Lots of questions, every time I look at that site I wonder why someone has not been prosecuted for what is a blatant disregard for all regulations.

 

[Theresa Green]

I think you are missing the point

Tory donating big business don’t do rules

They shit on everything

 

[Lucy]

I have read all the replies with interest and have a few of questions out of sheer interest (no fingers pointed, just interested)

1) You mentioned the golf course is on a 25 year? when is that up? will it be renewed?

2) So Luddington leased the land, and then proceeded to trash it, and fill it with waste and all sorts. This went on for some time, and surely breached the lease conditions for the land? Do you know if they were financially punished?

3) I assume the land handed back (the trashed bit) is completely useless and worthless. You could not build on it now, its 90% basically a landfill site now, so would need an incredible amount of ground work to become anything. So basically what we are left with is a mess next to our Castle site and damage to the local environment, and someone somewhere made a lot of money.

4) What was the contractual arrangement between Luddington and the Golf course (as I assume they were expecting a new extended course and surely must have had some financial investment in the site or organisation to carry out the works?

Lots of questions, every time I look at that site I wonder why someone has not been prosecuted for what is a blatant disregard for all regulations.

I don't know the answer to the majority of that. I'm not sure if the lease is still 25 years, it was when the members own the club.

 

[tek-monkey]

I don't know the answer to the majority of that. I'm not sure if the lease is still 25 years, it was when the members own the club.

Is that 25 years remaining or thats what the lease was for originally? Any idea how long they'd had the lease when they gave it away?

 

[Lucy]

No. I'm also referring to the lease of the land the golf course is on now.