TFOCP needs your help

Mike smith (friendsofcentralparkplymouthuk@gmail.com)
Add to contacts
10:46




To: Veronica Graham




Hi Everyone,

OK, one final leaflet drop!!

We have 1000 leaflets arriving on Wednesday with sample objection letter and information of where to send it!  Can anyone help deliver these?  Especially the roads around Outland Rd, Central Park and Peverell.

I can drop leaflets to you if you ring me and let me know where to bring them.

Thanks

Veronica 

http://www.pmchyouth.co.uk

http://localgiving.com/charity/new4youyouthgroup/project/new4you-city-centre-youth-group

http://www.thenetinplymouth.co.uk/

forward them ian's comments about them that would be helpful to them im sure.

Try asking at the local news agents see if they would allow you to stick them in newspapers before they are delivered?

1000 leaflets = a couple of hours steady walking.    If they all exercise regularly by jogging round the park then they can do it themselves in no time in a relay.    I suspect however they just look at the park but then again I'm not a friend of central park particularly anyway or dog shit alley as I know it.   Contraversial thought I know  but not everyone is desperate to keep it as it is.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

1000 leaflets = a couple of hours steady walking.    If they all exercise regularly by jogging round the park then they can do it themselves in no time in a relay.    I suspect however they just look at the park but then again I'm not a friend of central park particularly anyway or dog shit alley as I know it.   Contraversial thought I know  but not everyone is desperate to keep it as it is.

so would you be happy to build all over it? what would be next if they did that? the hoe or dartmoor?

No not all of it but Cottage Fields isn't exactly a wonderful site as it is.     Plymouth expanded using unbuilt upon ground originally.  The what next question is not really relevant as bulding on the Hoe and Dartmoor is not being considered.    If everything was objected to then nothing would get built anywhere and there is always somebody willing to scream and holler about their view.    From a personal view point I don't object to some of the park being used if it is kept to one end of it.    Not a popular view maybe on here or with that group but it's mine and there are probably a load of Plymothians who wouldn't object as well.     Out of a population of 260000 I'd be interested to know how many object to any of the Central Park projects.    A majority?    I doubt it.    A small percentage?   I expect so.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

No not all of it but Cottage Fields isn't exactly a wonderful site as it is.     Plymouth expanded using unbuilt upon ground originally.  The what next question is not really relevant as bulding on the Hoe and Dartmoor is not being considered.    If everything was objected to then nothing would get built anywhere and there is always somebody willing to scream and holler about their view.    From a personal view point I don't object to some of the park being used if it is kept to one end of it.    Not a popular view maybe on here or with that group but it's mine and there are probably a load of Plymothians who wouldn't object as well.     Out of a population of 260000 I'd be interested to know how many object to any of the Central Park projects.    A majority?    I doubt it.    A small percentage?   I expect so.

Its not the building on the carpark people object too i dont certainly i stated already my view on it all many times so i wont repeat it here but in short im not against it all just the impact its going to have on the clubs future ie the small stand never being able to be extended and the road accesses around the stadium which is dangerous and im yet to see evidence that it isnt from the plans.

Regeneration is needed throughout plymouth certainly and this sort of investment Brent has planned is taylor made for the city centre where its crying out for investment. Building it all in one carpark and adjacent to a football stadium in the middle of no where isnt going to work imho and its just going to be a clusterfuck of things cramped and access to it is going to be a nightmare.

1,000 leaflets! How many trees have been murdered to make the paper?! I for one am disgusted.

hairy j wrote:

1,000 leaflets! How many trees have been murdered to make the paper?! I for one am disgusted.

They used Recycle paper

You miss part of my point Angry. Your question about Hoe and Dartmoor for example. That sounds like you are against building on any of the park at all. You then state you aren't particularly so what was the point of the Hoe Dartmoor question? "People object". What people exactly? The ones who are against anything Brent is involved in or in other words ATD users. People who live close to Central Park whose view might be interupted or they will have less space for their dogs to crap in. Who else? The fact is the majority of Plymothians aren't the slightest bit interested. It is only ever minority groups in Cities who object to stuff and never the majority of the residents by a very long way. If this development was a clone of The Emerates and Argyle were going to have the benefit of the entire content then half the objections would dry up altogether. Had the World Cup plan come off there would have been rejoicing by the vast majority and all this don't like any of it stuff wouldn't have been an issue. FOCP would have been on their own. (except swampy and knecht that is)

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

You miss part of my point Angry.    Your question about Hoe and Dartmoor for example.    That sounds like you are against building on any of the park at all.    You then state you aren't particularly so what was the point of the Hoe Dartmoor question?    "People object".    What people exactly?    The ones who are against anything Brent is involved in or in other words ATD users.    People who live close to Central Park whose view might be interupted or they will have less space for their dogs to crap in.    Who else?    The fact is the majority of Plymothians aren't the slightest bit interested.     It is only ever minority groups in Cities who object to stuff and never the majority of the residents by a very long way.    If this development was a clone of The Emerates and Argyle were going to have the benefit of the entire content then half the objections would dry up altogether.     Had the World Cup plan come off there would have been rejoicing by the vast majority and all this don't like any of it stuff wouldn't have been an issue.   FOCP would have been on their own.    (except swampy and knecht that is)

firstly im pushed for time at work so ill continue this later but for now i shall just say this

I think if you read the majority on here (not all i grant you) but many, they are explaining why they are against the plans (some of it or all of it its mixed) and its not simply because its brent's payday because at the end of the day he was always going to build on the carpark and that wasnt a secret nor is it because ian is getting all excited verbally and lyrically bashing pensioners in his over the top support.

secondly
the world cup pipe dream would never of happened as again outland road is too small to cope with the increased levels so the plans would have been rejected and a new location sort if that ever came about and in my own opinion that was ridiculous what was proposed and this club certainly doesnt need a 60000 seater stadium...30-35000 would be the absolute max.

The underlying complaint on here is because it is Brent and the usual suspects are supporting it. If it was anyone else, taking apart the disappointment of size which males usually are, then the objections wouldn't be anywhere near. That's opinion by the way but it is an educated guess given the spleens being vented over everything that happens whatever it is.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

......  FOCP would have been on their own.    (except swampy and knecht that is)

....and mannamead babe and Dingle and McFry and tgwu and someone else who didn't make himself known whose name I forget for the moment. We valiant few have stood against the mighty hordes of Concreteers and have fought valiantly. In times to come they will say of us that this was our finest hour.

We are currently digging tunnels along with the AFT and preparing to climb the tress to stall the development. You just wait for what we have planned for the centre circle.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

The underlying complaint on here is because it is Brent and the usual suspects are supporting it.    If it was anyone else, taking apart the disappointment of size which males usually are, then the objections wouldn't be anywhere near.    That's opinion by the way but it is an educated guess given the spleens being vented over everything that happens whatever it is.

Rubbish. If you actually read through the relevant threads you'll see that lots of people are unhappy with the size of the new stand and the inability to expand. And that I - to take one example - have been very consistent about the notion of a cinema in a public park.

And even if Paul Mariner or Billy Rafferty had come up with this plan, I'd be saying exactly the same things.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

The underlying complaint on here is because it is Brent and the usual suspects are supporting it.    If it was anyone else, taking apart the disappointment of size which males usually are, then the objections wouldn't be anywhere near.    That's opinion by the way but it is an educated guess given the spleens being vented over everything that happens whatever it is.

You could very easily say that if Kevin Heaney proposed all of this Pasoti and especially you along with chris webb and ian newell would be up in arms trying to protect the clubs interests and calling the dogs of war etc etc and i can prove that as look what they did when Kevin Heaney proposed all of this when he was lined up to buy the club.

Because lets face facts if ian and chris werent so into Brent and all of his kingly possessions they would be against the plans given the size of the stand as they harm the club's ambitions. that's not an opinion that would be fact.

I did mention size Peggy so I am actually aware that it is a big problem. I'd like it to be bigger as well (O'er Matron). I don't quite get why I would be up in arms if this was Heaney. I was never a "dog of war" when they were called. The whole point is that this is, in my opinion, as much to do with it being Brent as anything else for a number of people. I repeat again for Peggy's benefit, apart from the size of capacity which I said originally. If Brent offered Emerates style building now that he is Mr Persona non gratta there would still be people bellyaching. People particularly on ATD don't like Brent much because he won't give all his money to buying premiership ambition. I don't care what they put in the development particularly. Just because it's going to be in Central Park doesn't matter that much to me. I repeat that it probably won't matter much to the vast majority of Plymothians either who haven't set foot near the Park in donkey's years.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

I did mention size Peggy so I am actually aware that it is a big problem.    I'd like it to be bigger as well (O'er Matron).    I don't quite get why I would be up in arms if this was Heaney.    I was never a "dog of war" when they were called.    The whole point is that this is, in my opinion, as much to do with it being Brent as anything else for a number of people.     I repeat again for Peggy's benefit, apart from the size of capacity which I said originally.    If Brent offered Emerates style building now that he is Mr Persona non gratta there would still be people bellyaching.    People particularly on ATD don't like Brent much because he won't give all his money to buying premiership ambition.    I don't care what they put in the development particularly.    Just because it's going to be in Central Park doesn't matter that much to me.    I repeat that it probably won't matter much to the vast majority of Plymothians either who haven't set foot near the Park in donkey's years.  

Whatever "sensible" your clearly poking at the fire for reactions with your sweeping statements about what people believe in or not on here.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

I did mention size Peggy so I am actually aware that it is a big problem.    I'd like it to be bigger as well (O'er Matron).    I don't quite get why I would be up in arms if this was Heaney.    I was never a "dog of war" when they were called.    The whole point is that this is, in my opinion, as much to do with it being Brent as anything else for a number of people.     I repeat again for Peggy's benefit, apart from the size of capacity which I said originally.    If Brent offered Emerates style building now that he is Mr Persona non gratta there would still be people bellyaching.    People particularly on ATD don't like Brent much because he won't give all his money to buying premiership ambition.    I don't care what they put in the development particularly.    Just because it's going to be in Central Park doesn't matter that much to me.   I repeat that it probably won't matter much to the vast majority of Plymothians either who haven't set foot near the Park in donkey's years.

People who live in St Judes or Greenbank,with Beaumont Park handy,or similarly the residents of Devonport who also have access to their own park,are hardly likely to be using Central Park much,are they? Doesn't mean to say though that they don't give a toss about what goes on in other areas of the city or don't empathise with the residents who are most likely to use Central Park.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

 I repeat that it probably won't matter much to the vast majority of Plymothians either who haven't set foot near the Park in donkey's years.  

Sensiblegreeny previously whilst admonishing us all wrote:

   
What I said is that people should not speak for a silent majority as if it was an undisputable fact

Oh dear...

I said probably Rickler for your nit picking files not definately. I happen to think they won't care much but I'm not speaking for them as such.

Why is it picking for affect Angry? There is much written on here by a variety of people and my comments are as allowable as their's. There is no "affect" in my comments they are my opinion and just because it doesn't tick your box does not make it trolling does it. That sort of accusation gets chucked about a lot if somebody doesn't sing the same song as I've said before. Look back at one of my original posts on this subject. I said I know it is a contraversial thought on here but it is mine nonetheless.

The simple answer to you Greenskin is an absolute 100% yes. I do believe people in general won't give a monkeys from other areas although concede there will be a few who do. If it was their area involved then they might care a lot more but others who are friends of somewhere else would lose some of their caring to make up for it. That's just the way life is in the Nimby world. A village or small town objects to something on their doorstep and campaign to stop it. It gets stopped. That means that somebody else will have a fight in their place when it gets shifted to their backyard. Meanwhile the orignal campaigners stop the fight having won their particular battle apart from maybe a bit of free advice on how they did it. Eventually it gets built somewhere and somebody loses the final battle. It's the way of the world.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

I said probably Rickler for your nit picking files not definately.     I happen to think they won't care much but I'm not speaking for them as such.

Why is it picking for affect Angry?     There is much written on here by a variety of people and my comments are as allowable as their's.    There is no "affect" in my comments they are my opinion and just because it doesn't tick your box does not make it trolling does it.    That sort of accusation gets chucked about a lot if somebody doesn't sing the same song as I've said before.    Look back at one of my original posts on this subject.    I said I know it is a contraversial thought on here but it is mine nonetheless.    

The simple answer to you Greenskin is an absolute 100% yes.     I do believe people in general won't give a monkeys from other areas although concede there will be a few who do.    If it was their area involved then they might care a lot more but others who are friends of somewhere else would lose some of their caring to make up for it.    That's just the way life is in the Nimby world.   A village or small town objects to something on their doorstep and campaign to stop it.     It gets stopped.     That means that somebody else will have a fight in their place when it gets shifted to their backyard.    Meanwhile the orignal campaigners stop the fight having won their particular battle apart from maybe a bit of free advice on how they did it.     Eventually it gets built somewhere and somebody loses the final battle.     It's the way of the world.

you clearly dont read posts do you? and choose to blatantly ignore what some are actually saying on this matter becasue its fashionable on the farm to think we have nothing better to do then be anti argyle. Go read some posts on this matter and see if your "only against it becasue its brent" argument stands!

your entitled to believe what you want, however, if your going to make comments that are designed to get a bite at least have some validation to your claims.

Peggy * wrote:

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

The underlying complaint on here is because it is Brent and the usual suspects are supporting it.    If it was anyone else, taking apart the disappointment of size which males usually are, then the objections wouldn't be anywhere near.    That's opinion by the way but it is an educated guess given the spleens being vented over everything that happens whatever it is.

Rubbish. If you actually read through the relevant threads you'll see that lots of people are unhappy with the size of the new stand and the inability to expand. And that I - to take one example - have been very consistent about the notion of a cinema in a public park.

And even if Paul Mariner or Billy Rafferty had come up with this plan, I'd be saying exactly the same things.

everything is either too small or in the wrong place or BOTH!!!

There you go again Angry. Just accept the fact that not everyone agrees with the majority of those that actually post on ATD. I say post because the majority don't seem to although they are registered as members. The "everything Brent" comment is borne out by the numerous posts made on numerous subjects which all rubbish anything and everything Brent proposes. Ergo the opinion that this is as much to do with it's Brent's baby as anything else. I'm judging this build in Central Park as an individual subject and not just added to a list of anything Brent. I think the capacity should be bigger but am not overly concerned that some of the park is built on or what it contains in the build itself. I would like all of it to benefit the football club financially is another want but not where the revenue would come from. This has nothing whatsoever to do with pasoti's opinion of anything. I haven't even read the comments on there on the subject.

The proof will be in the final outcome where details are or will be available regarding overall condemnation by the people of Plymouth. i.e. the number of objections. Lets see how big or small they are then divided into the population. My belief is they will be small whereas others seem to think the masses will rise. I'll bet the majority of those made will come from the area closest to Central Park and people from further afield won't say a dickie bird. I also happen to believe the thing will go ahead despite any opposition. Time will tell.

well lets prove your theory right or wrong shall we.....

The one thing to add to the above is the what if it gets stopped and none of it happens. Nothing left in it for Brent and some people might get their wish that he just fecks off. With nothing left of value it would be interesting times for the football side. The theory that there is somebody out there better would be tested that's for sure and my only hope is that it is true and others want to take a punt at running the club because the alternative is not worth thinking about. That isn't an opinion that Brent is wonderful by the way because he is far from that before that charge is levelled.