Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

richie keay

Eyesore In The Corner

Recommended Posts

I was interested to see that the corner of the ground where the old Barrow Rugby Club/Nightclub is situated was taped off on Sunday due to a large amount of debris lying on the terraces. An interesting question was raised at work today, which I couldn't answer. If a section of the roof was to come loose and hit a spectator during a game due to the high winds we experienced on Sunday, who would be liable, Barrow Rugby or the owner of the building.

And the next question I would ask would be how much worse does the building have to become before it becomes unsafe and the owner is forced to pull it down by the council due to health and safety reasons. It is now in such a state of disrepair that the safety of the paying public is now being put at risk, meaning the whole area where the souvenir shop is located would need to be closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked this question a short while ago Richie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not 100% sure it would be. You'd presume the owner of the buildings but then again should Barrow RLFC be letting someone in the ground if there is a risk of a spectator being hit by debris?

I wish we could just demolish it but unfortunately we can't. Really is a waste of space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is my understanding that if ( god forbid) if any person (spectator, staff, volunteers, or players) got injured while a attending Craven Park for whatever reason Barrow RL would be responsible. The injured party would peruse Barrow RL for compensation then it would be BarrowRL who would be responsible to peruse the owner in turn to get compensation from them after proving they had done everything possible to ensure the safety of all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While talking about this subject on Sunday I heard 2 stories, (1) Mr Johnston applies for planning permission every year at the cost of £100 and in turn the council can not obtain a compulsory purchase order as it looks like he is going to redevelop it and (2) that there are talks of him building a new bar and the club renting it off him, if this were true I would say the club would be mad to go down this route as it's just throwing money away. If your going to pay rent (long term) on a bar you don't own why not get a loan and extend and modernise the bar you do? At least at the end of the payments it's ours and any sales and profits come back into the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While talking about this subject on Sunday I heard 2 stories, (1) Mr Johnston applies for planning permission every year at the cost of £100 and in turn the council can not obtain a compulsory purchase order as it looks like he is going to redevelop it and (2) that there are talks of him building a new bar and the club renting it off him, if this were true I would say the club would be mad to go down this route as it's just throwing money away. If your going to pay rent (long term) on a bar you don't own why not get a loan and extend and modernise the bar you do? At least at the end of the payments it's ours and any sales and profits come back into the club.

 

Paul

There is a legal covenant on the ground which restricts were alcohol can be sold and this is held by the owner of Josephine's night club. The club officials have to negotiate a deal to sell alcohol as in the new outside bar. Extending the Raiders Bar would break the rules of the covenant. so the best way forward IMO would be to purchase the night club and release the covenant (once the financial position enables of course).

 

Should any one be hurt by any materials falling from a building then it is the building owner which is liable, however should it be obvious that there is a danger then the club would need to cordon off that section and report it to the authorities and the owner other wise they could take part responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neil was the covenant not for the outside bar only?

And cheers Rob, I do hope something is done soon for everyone's sake..

just a quick thought.. If there is no Josephines does that mean there can be no covenant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another question to Neil Martin, a few years ago when the Clive Street wall collapsed during the winter, I believe the rugby were threatened with closure, and had to rebuild the wall before the start of the season, which Neil's company did.

Barrow rugby obviously own the wall at that part of the ground, what is the difference, can the council not force the owner of the building to demolish it before it collapses through a compulsory purchase order, or will the rugby have to close the area which has the souvenier shop and snack bar. Would we then be able to claim loss of earnings on match days off the owner of the derelict eyesore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neil was the covenant not for the outside bar only?

And cheers Rob, I do hope something is done soon for everyone's sake..

just a quick thought.. If there is no Josephines does that mean there can be no covenant?

 

Paul

 

The covenant covers the whole of the ground which restricts the areas Alcohol can be sold in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another question to Neil Martin, a few years ago when the Clive Street wall collapsed during the winter, I believe the rugby were threatened with closure, and had to rebuild the wall before the start of the season, which Neil's company did.

Barrow rugby obviously own the wall at that part of the ground, what is the difference, can the council not force the owner of the building to demolish it before it collapses through a compulsory purchase order, or will the rugby have to close the area which has the souvenier shop and snack bar meaning. Would we be able to claim loss of earnings on match days off the owner of the derelict eyesore.

 

Richie

 

I don't think it would be in the long term interest of the club to go against the owner of Josephine's due to the covenant. The Council has powers to request the repair/demolition of any building if the condition becomes a public safety issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neil was the covenant not for the outside bar only?

And cheers Rob, I do hope something is done soon for everyone's sake..

just a quick thought.. If there is no Josephines does that mean there can be no covenant?

I should imagine Paul that if the nightclub is no more, wether it is sold or knocked down that there would be no-more covenant. I think the covenant was brought in when steve johnson helped the club financially. I might be wrong though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember someone quoting a figure of 5k per year payable by the club to the covenant owner, whether this is a fair amount after all these years is another matter. Maybe it is safe to presume as long as there is a footprint of a nightclub then the covenant can’t be removed and the club cannot move forward and the eyesore will remain for years to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Richie

 

I don't think it would be in the long term interest of the club to go against the owner of Josephine's due to the covenant. The Council has powers to request the repair/demolition of any building if the condition becomes a public safety issue.

 

Surely that is the position we are in now then, with a large area of the ground cordoned off on Sunday due to fallen debris from the building; like I said on a previous post. HOW MUCH WORST DOES IT NEED TO GET BEFORE THE COUNCIL STEPS IN.

P.S I'm not shouting at you Neil, I'm just bloody frustrated with the whole situation which has gone on for far too long!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you Richie. Does someone have to get hurt before the council step in. If it gets worse does that mean they would have to close the gate next to the Lewthwaite Suite. Where would that leave the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just e-mailed an old friend of mine on the Borough Council and asked him to look into this problem, it simply cannot be allowed to continue. It is not my place to do this but I will not sit back and wait for someone to get hurt/injured.

 

Perhaps Paul Turner from the NW Evening Mail might like to pop down with a photographer and then confront the owner with the  evidence, sometimes a bit of naming and shaming can work.  We could do our bit by boycotting his establishment.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a new twist on the situation.Trader mentioned the "footprint" of the nightclub.

It is my understanding that the rugby own the land beneath the nightclub,(which is built on stilts)and have a legal right of way under it. so if it WAS demolished,there would be no footprint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a new twist on the situation.Trader mentioned the "footprint" of the nightclub.

It is my understanding that the rugby own the land beneath the nightclub,(which is built on stilts)and have a legal right of way under it. so if it WAS demolished,there would be no footprint.

 

The club had a legal right of  way under the night club as a fire exit but I think that was relinquished when I built the new entrance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how long has it stood empty now ? something has to be done with asap but cant Johnston doing a thing with it tho so surely local council will have too with it being unsafe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neil, I have today spoken to two ex directors and also a current director, they all verified that we still have the right of way under the club.

Livo, apparently a family member of the current owner of the club has been storing building materials underneath. This was how I first became aware of the situation, because it was fenced off, thus impeding the right of way across.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neil, I have today spoken to two ex directors and also a current director, they all verified that we still have the right of way under the club.

Livo, apparently a family member of the current owner of the club has been storing building materials underneath. This was how I first became aware of the situation, because it was fenced off, thus impeding the right of way across.

I looked into this matter in great detail and can assure you that the right of way has gone , hence the fencing has now been put up.  When  I was dealing with the financial side me and my solicitor looked into the possibility of purchase of the club and there was a lot of dealing which had gone on in the past and the right of way was kept at the time due to it being a fire escape, however the new entrance removed the requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like an accidental demolition ball to me  :sclerosis:

Give Mylee Cyrus a call ..I hear shes good with a wrecking ball :shout:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would anybody in their right minds relinquish a right of way, whether it was needed or not ? The mind boggles !!!!

If it HAS happened however, someone wants their ###e kicking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



100 Days That Shook Rugby League

League Express - Every Monday

Rugby League World - Oct 2017