whalsa Posted November 24, 2015 Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 If this gentleman is not allowed to have planning permission because his customers would have to drive there, which is against local policy, how on earth did Sumburgh Lighthouse get planning permission to extend and have a shop when I don't know of any bus route to it and it is a very long walk to the lighthouse from the nearest house. Another seriously weak analogy, given Sumburgh Head is a site of significant natural heritage. People travel to see Sumburgh Head itself, of which the Visitor Centre (Lighthouse) is a part. It's not even close to the same as a restaurant. Yes hjasga but I think the point was HOW do they travel there? By vehicle. Judging by the outcry on social media and from conversations I have had with people personally this restaurant could well be a success, so what if people have to drive there? Most people have to drive everywhere any time they want to go anywhere in Shetland. As has been said before it would be interesting to know how many of the planning officials use public transport or walk/cycle everywhere they go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hjasga Posted November 24, 2015 Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 If this gentleman is not allowed to have planning permission because his customers would have to drive there, which is against local policy, how on earth did Sumburgh Lighthouse get planning permission to extend and have a shop when I don't know of any bus route to it and it is a very long walk to the lighthouse from the nearest house. Another seriously weak analogy, given Sumburgh Head is a site of significant natural heritage. People travel to see Sumburgh Head itself, of which the Visitor Centre (Lighthouse) is a part. It's not even close to the same as a restaurant. Yes hjasga but I think the point was HOW do they travel there? By vehicle. That's not disputed. The difference is that Sumburgh Head is there by design of nature. You can't up and move the colonies of several species of seabird to somewhere more accessible. A restaurant isn't comparable and attempts to compare the two suggest people don't understand the arguments being made. Girzie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wotsit Posted November 24, 2015 Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 People can go and see the wildlife no problem, but planning obviously let them have a shop and exhibition centre and function room (which can be used, hired for parties) where there is no bus route and you need a car and therefore is NOT accessible to all. You don't need shop and function room etc to look at the birds, very nice to have though and makes for a more pleasant enjoyable experience and good for them for getting it.Quendale Mill also has a café - no bus route You cannot have one rule for one and one for another or can you on Shetland depending on who is applying for it ? whalsa 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hjasga Posted November 24, 2015 Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 Again, these are attractions that already existed to some degree. Sumburgh Head was already attracting visitors, Quendale Mill was already attracting visitors. Increasing the level of service available, whether through a shop or cafe or otherwise, is simply an extension of something that already exists. They also aren't acting as private enterprises but are primarily there to help fund the visitor attractions themselves. It simply isn't a valid comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wotsit Posted November 24, 2015 Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 Just because the attraction existed before does not mean that it doesn't have to comply to the policies. The function room is not available to all unless you can drive, this is one of the arguments the Council are trying to use to stop the Italian restaurant. I'm sure there are many other examples where the council have tried to stop developments using tenuous links to policies and let others get away with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Ghostrider Posted November 24, 2015 Popular Post Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 Did a couple not get planning permission to site a shop at Cunningsburgh sometime around one year ago (and good luck to them), that if there's half a dozen houses within "reasonable" walking distance that's about all. On the face of it Planning are saying its "okay" to drive to a shop in the countryside, buy a frozen pizza, then drive home, cook it and eat it there. But not okay to drive to someplace in the countryside where you can sit down and eat a pizza that's been cooked there. Buying and consuming food is getting to be as complicted s buying and drinking alcohol at this rate. Gorgonzola Butt-cheese, George., BGDDisco and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post whalsa Posted November 24, 2015 Popular Post Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 I think what this incident has highlighted is that many people are not happy about the way planning decisions are carried out in Shetland and how the policies appear to be open to interpretation in such a way as it seems to be different rules for different people because of decisions being so inconsistent. If we set up a new Government free of the interference from the EU/UK then we could create a planning policy which better suits Shetland and hopefully get a system which works better for everyone. Gorgonzola Butt-cheese, Da Burra Shop, fionajohn and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wotsit Posted November 24, 2015 Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 Difficult one, a new system would not necessarily stop local politics at play. concerned shetlander 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wotsit Posted November 24, 2015 Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 What happens now a Full Committee, and is that like the Review body? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgonzola Butt-cheese Posted November 24, 2015 Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 This needs a major review . The planning department is not fit for purpose. fionajohn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George. Posted November 24, 2015 Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 You cannot have one rule for one and one for another or can you on Shetland depending on who is applying for it ? I wonder just how many of the S.I.C find themselves able to comfortably walk across Lerwick, how many find that they have to use the bus service and how many blatantly order somebody else to do it for them, and whether that has anything to do with the fact that the proposed restaurant is having to fight, tooth and nail, because the S.I.C think that the bus service that they provide is utterly crap. fionajohn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wotsit Posted November 24, 2015 Report Share Posted November 24, 2015 We need more smart classy restaurants to open up to give choice, the choice is very limited in Shetland, where the food and surroundings inside and out are to a high standard.I really hope he pushes this all the way, it is what Shetland needs along with some smarter pubs/bars that also serve quality meals. fionajohn and concerned shetlander 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whalsa Posted November 26, 2015 Report Share Posted November 26, 2015 Wir Shetland will have a sign up station in Bolts tonight from about 5.30pm onwards to coincide with late night shopping. If you or anyone you know want to sign up or are seeking more information about the group please come along for a yarn! Please convey this message to anyone who may be interested but has no online presence as we are keen to ensure these people are included. Ghostrider and George. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmie Posted November 27, 2015 Report Share Posted November 27, 2015 I am probably wrong but get the impression that there is an automatic "how can I stop this" response to planning requests, rather than a positive helpful reaction.It seems to be a council thing, emphasising the negative, can't do instead of can do. Daegerty and George. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whalsa Posted November 27, 2015 Report Share Posted November 27, 2015 I am probably wrong but get the impression that there is an automatic "how can I stop this" response to planning requests, rather than a positive helpful reaction.It seems to be a council thing, emphasising the negative, can't do instead of can do. Unless it is a vanity project in Lerwick then its the polar opposite, "get this done whatever the cost!". Daegerty 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now