|
Post by gastower on Dec 9, 2016 11:08:58 GMT
Just received an e mail from South Gloucestershire council confirming the removal of clause 7 and 13 from the previous planning permission has been agreed.So presumably the earth movers will be next. Thats assuming, of course, we have bought the land
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2016 11:16:21 GMT
Just received an e mail from South Gloucestershire council confirming the removal of clause 7 and 13 from the previous planning permission has been agreed.So presumably the earth movers will be next. Thats assuming, of course, we have bought the land What was in clause 7 & 13?
|
|
|
Post by gastower on Dec 9, 2016 11:19:43 GMT
Hours when the centre could be used - only after 6 pm in school term and not to be used by " professional sportsmen"
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Dec 9, 2016 11:24:40 GMT
Just received an e mail from South Gloucestershire council confirming the removal of clause 7 and 13 from the previous planning permission has been agreed.So presumably the earth movers will be next. Thats assuming, of course, we have bought the land Depends if the Irish horse grazer will now let us have it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2016 11:32:33 GMT
Hours when the centre could be used - only after 6 pm in school term and not to be used by " professional sportsmen" The way we've been playing lately it wont be used by professional sportsmen...
|
|
|
Post by Dirt Dogg on Dec 9, 2016 11:44:31 GMT
Get the diggers in
|
|
|
Post by Gas_Quarters on Dec 9, 2016 11:52:00 GMT
Just received an e mail from South Gloucestershire council confirming the removal of clause 7 and 13 from the previous planning permission has been agreed.So presumably the earth movers will be next. Thats assuming, of course, we have bought the land So does this mean that any complaints/objections have been overruled? Sorry I'm not good with legal stuff.
|
|
|
Post by alvestongas on Dec 9, 2016 11:53:35 GMT
I would hope a deal was already in place subject to PP to purchase the land. I think it's currently owned by a "sporting body". If we have permission and the purchase can complete soon then work could commence very quickly! UTG
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Dec 9, 2016 12:02:03 GMT
Just received an e mail from South Gloucestershire council confirming the removal of clause 7 and 13 from the previous planning permission has been agreed.So presumably the earth movers will be next. Thats assuming, of course, we have bought the land So does this mean that any complaints/objections have been overruled? Sorry I'm not good with legal stuff. So have we got full pp to proceed or just had the clauses moved from the previous decision so we can now, hopefully, get full pp?? S Glos website still suggests "awaiting a decision". developments.southglos.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=OCS0FUOKG6G00
|
|
|
Post by garystash on Dec 9, 2016 12:07:10 GMT
Just received an e mail from South Gloucestershire council confirming the removal of clause 7 and 13 from the previous planning permission has been agreed.So presumably the earth movers will be next. Thats assuming, of course, we have bought the land Why would they email you? Did you comment on the application or something?
|
|
|
Post by northsidegas on Dec 9, 2016 12:24:26 GMT
Circulated schedule reports are on the south glos documents page cant read it on my phone though, can someone tell me what is says dated 9/12/16
|
|
|
Post by garystash on Dec 9, 2016 12:29:37 GMT
Circulated schedule reports are on the south glos documents page cant read it on my phone though, can someone tell me what is says dated 9/12/16 Think this is the bit we're interested in:
|
|
|
Post by northsidegas on Dec 9, 2016 12:37:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by countygroundhotel on Dec 9, 2016 12:41:48 GMT
Real news at last. Someone will cranking the handle on the club website to confirm this anytime now.......
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Dec 9, 2016 12:42:07 GMT
Interestingly, it looks like we've piggy-backed in on the back of Rugby permission. I guess, under law, they can't give a permission for rugby and deny a similar permission for football. developments.southglos.gov.uk/online-applications/files/27281565A27FDEE25834A554E29FCAAB/pdf/PT16_4965_RVC-CIRCULATED_SCHEDULE_REPORT-5410213.pdfOfficers consider having regard to the planning history above, that there is no continuing overriding reason to limit the use of the site to the previous applicant and Bristol Combination Trustees. The reasons for the condition relate to transport, Green Belt and residential amenity. The transport issue has fallen away (see comments above relating to Condition 7), and as the development is appropriate Green Belt development, Green Belt policy would not be breached by the use of the site for the same, outdoor recreational purposes by a different organisation. With regard to residential amenity, and the concern over potential increase intensity of use of the site leading to noise and disturbance, it is acknowledged that there is likely to be increased intensity of use of the site compared to its current use by Coalpit Heath FC. However the original planning permission for the sports use of the site was for a centre of excellence for the Rugby Combination Clubs, which would have been more intense than the current level of use. However this is not considered likely to be significantly detrimental to the amenity of the adjacent residents, the closest being adjacent to the western boundary of the site, as the clubhouse and car park are located within the centre of the site, some 80m from the nearest dwelling. Moreover, it is considered that the site is currently underused and a greater level of use will constitute and efficient use of the site. It is acknowledged however, that the applicant, Bristol Rovers FC, who intend to use the pitches for training, are a professional club who draw many 1000s of fans to home matches. It is therefore considered necessary to ensure that the permission is limited to preclude this taking place at the site, as this would significantly change the character of the planning permission, having regard to the reasons for imposing the condition: Green Belt, residential amenity and transport. The following new condition is therefore considered appropriate: The site the subject of this application (within the red line) shall be not be used for first team professional league or cup matches nor shall it be used for games/matches for which there is ticketed / paid admission.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Dec 9, 2016 12:49:14 GMT
Gotta love Almondsbury Parish Council's objection:
"The removal of the conditions will affect local residents and we want the conditions to remain."
|
|
|
Post by Dirt Dogg on Dec 9, 2016 12:50:03 GMT
Gotta love Almondsbury Parish Council's object: "The removal of the conditions will affect local residents and we want the conditions to remain." Trolololol
|
|
|
Post by Dirt Dogg on Dec 9, 2016 12:51:33 GMT
Hortham lane isn't even in Almonsbury, it's down a small country lane next to the motorway, I mean, it's not even in near the Hortham Village Estate! Why do people feel the need to even object to stuff like this? Makes me laugh
|
|
|
Post by A Source (aka Angry Badger) on Dec 9, 2016 13:01:20 GMT
Almondsbury council will object just to please the handful of people that objected. I thinks its too late for them to object on the grounds that the air ambulance may be in danger of being taken out by a wayward clearance. Pretty sure that one of the Carsons Road objections was one of the wildlife trusts. No evidence of Badger sets but were concerned they might want to move in. Note:- they built a massive ring road regardless
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Dec 9, 2016 13:29:21 GMT
Can we extend the planning to a 22k all seater stadium? No? Bugger.
|
|