|
|
Post by curlywurly on Oct 4, 2023 22:32:35 GMT
You asked for evidence of consultation with BCC Planning and it is here. The following is an extract from the Design and Access Statement that was submitted with the planning application on 6th April 2023.
"There are some minor deviations from the best practice recommendations, and these were highlighted and requested to be actioned during the recent meeting between Bristol Rovers Football Club, the Safety Advisory Group and representatives from Building Control, the Planning Department and Arena Group."
Proof enough?
That is great. In fact that aligns exactly with what I said: "What a good idea, speaking to the planning officer. Its a shame we didn't do that back in February." You are saying that we talked to them after the submission had gone in. I was saying why didn't we consilt them back in Feb, before we put the application in. Jesus. NO.
Read what I said.
The Design and Access Statement categorically proves that we were in consultation with BCC Planning before submitting the application.
|
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Oct 5, 2023 4:56:32 GMT
That is great. In fact that aligns exactly with what I said: "What a good idea, speaking to the planning officer. Its a shame we didn't do that back in February." You are saying that we talked to them after the submission had gone in. I was saying why didn't we consilt them back in Feb, before we put the application in. Jesus. NO.
Read what I said.
The Design and Access Statement categorically proves that we were in consultation with BCC Planning before submitting the application.
Thanks for providing that. One last question: Is "Representantives of building control" the same as "planning officer's advice." TIA Also, found this: www.bristol247.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/South-Stand-design-and-access-statement-Bristol-Rovers.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Oct 5, 2023 6:17:31 GMT
And I think it negates the “calling-in” of the original submission. If that’s the case, then the Green woman would look churlish, to say the least, if she calls in this one too . . .We as fans need to be very careful. One of the reasons given for calling it in is the number of comments. If Rovers fans start flooding the application again, there is a chance we would be giving her that reason again. Interesting. Where did it say this about the comment count? I cant imagine this small stand in BS7 got as many comments as most other developments in Bristol or the UK. If they can build a mosque on the edge of Soho, I'm sure a small sports stand can get through in BS7! |
|
|
|
Post by curlywurly on Oct 5, 2023 6:22:02 GMT
No, but if you read carefully you'll see that that particular meeting included building control and the planning department.
Your link was to the same document and the quote I provided is on the last page. This Design and Access Statement was submitted with the planning application - so the meeting indicated happened before submitting the planning application. I understand that there was other engagement between club, designers and the planning department before, but you were asking for evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Oct 5, 2023 7:19:21 GMT
No, but if you read carefully you'll see that that particular meeting included building control and the planning department.
Your link was to the same document and the quote I provided is on the last page. This Design and Access Statement was submitted with the planning application - so the meeting indicated happened before submitting the planning application. I understand that there was other engagement between club, designers and the planning department before, but you were asking for evidence.
Yes, I used the quote to find the link. I thought I'd post the link for anyone else who wanted to read it. I still don't think this is the same as getting "planning officer's advice", but maybe that is just symantics. It's a shame that the original documents have been taken down, it would be good to compare and contrast to the original one. Maybe there is a small detail in the 2nd one that we wouldn't see as being a big issue, but was missing from the first. It could be something as simple as drainage. Maybe there isn't. If anyone does have the documents, it would be great for them to be pinned to the thread somehow. |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Oct 5, 2023 8:46:43 GMT
No, but if you read carefully you'll see that that particular meeting included building control and the planning department.
Your link was to the same document and the quote I provided is on the last page. This Design and Access Statement was submitted with the planning application - so the meeting indicated happened before submitting the planning application. I understand that there was other engagement between club, designers and the planning department before, but you were asking for evidence.
Yes, I used the quote to find the link. I thought I'd post the link for anyone else who wanted to read it. I still don't think this is the same as getting "planning officer's advice", but maybe that is just symantics. It's a shame that the original documents have been taken down, it would be good to compare and contrast to the original one. Maybe there is a small detail in the 2nd one that we wouldn't see as being a big issue, but was missing from the first. It could be something as simple as drainage. Maybe there isn't. If anyone does have the documents, it would be great for them to be pinned to the thread somehow. I have a copy of the original documents. No idea how best to share them, surprised you didn't (read) download/print-off/frame them.... This is * clear* evidence of the club consulting with the Planning department and getting their advice - it was a meeting before the application was submitted where lots of different parties were discussing the application in great detail *before* it was finalised and submitted.... |
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Oct 5, 2023 9:01:30 GMT
We as fans need to be very careful. One of the reasons given for calling it in is the number of comments. If Rovers fans start flooding the application again, there is a chance we would be giving her that reason again. Interesting. Where did it say this about the comment count? I cant imagine this small stand in BS7 got as many comments as most other developments in Bristol or the UK. If they can build a mosque on the edge of Soho, I'm sure a small sports stand can get through in BS7! There is no football club in the UK who have faced this level of objections from local lobbyists. The massive cricket ground revamp including the gigantic stands recieved less objections . The Ashton gate revamp recieved less . Even the complete Ashton Vale new build recieved less. I made no apology in saying the Green Party have supported every single protest group .They are very powerful holding both local political power and social privileges. As a club / organisation we are only human. The club are under introspection and challenged in every decision they made. People don't realise that if a powerful group of lobbyist are continuing to scrutinise every plan . This feels both exhausting and disempowering. Imagine if the same was done to another community group or social organisation?. In regards to Bristolians posting positive comments on behalf of the club. I suggest if it goes to planning then we as supporters need to repeat the exercise all over again. Sadly once again we need to fight the lobbyist and write to the council and councillors. As I stated we have made mistakes. But anyone would if they are under investigation introspection and challenge. It's so sad many see the club as a hinderance instead of helping and working alongside to get a resolution. Put it another way. What evidence is there in 25 years that the Greens have supported us or the local lobbyist ?. I could list many statements the Greens supporting Trash Horfield Rose F.O .M.S and now this. It's ironic that once they win battles ( I never underestimated there protest skill). They are now conveying a message of co-operation and engagement. |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Oct 5, 2023 10:39:08 GMT
There is no football club in the UK who have faced this level of objections from local lobbyists. The massive cricket ground revamp including the gigantic stands recieved less objections . The Ashton gate revamp recieved less . Even the complete Ashton Vale new build recieved less. I made no apology in saying the Green Party have supported every single protest group .They are very powerful holding both local political power and social privileges. As a club / organisation we are only human. The club are under introspection and challenged in every decision they made. People don't realise that if a powerful group of lobbyist are continuing to scrutinise every plan . This feels both exhausting and disempowering. Imagine if the same was done to another community group or social organisation?. In regards to Bristolians posting positive comments on behalf of the club. I suggest if it goes to planning then we as supporters need to repeat the exercise all over again. Sadly once again we need to fight the lobbyist and write to the council and councillors. As I stated we have made mistakes. But anyone would if they are under investigation introspection and challenge. It's so sad many see the club as a hinderance instead of helping and working alongside to get a resolution. Put it another way. What evidence is there in 25 years that the Greens have supported us or the local lobbyist ?. I could list many statements the Greens supporting Trash Horfield Rose F.O .M.S and now this. It's ironic that once they win battles ( I never underestimated there protest skill). They are now conveying a message of co-operation and engagement. It has become a fight that should never have happened - 'they' (and I use this term loosely but we all know who I'm talking about in general) were clear during the UWE/Sainsbury's issue that they want to see the site remain a sporting venue....and yet ten years later they don't want a sensible and proportional upgrade to the facilities at that sporting venue... ...we know they don't want a supermarket on the site...do they want houses? Other than a stadium the only other suggestion I can remember they had was a velodrome - funded by the taxpayer and too small to host international events so no way it could *ever* get close to breaking even..... |
|
|
|
Post by wider on Oct 5, 2023 12:04:54 GMT
There’s an awful lot of wasted words and effort on here! Well done those with the patience to prove what we were told at the beginning that we had talked with all the official bodies before submission.
We were probably a bit naïve expecting a smooth ride but in planning terms this is a “can not be refused” scheme imho. If we had to go to Appeal we would almost certainly be awarded costs as well.
I’m hoping we are being a bit cleverer now by resubmitting with no possible points of objection left and enough (particularly green) points changed for locals to claim victory and we have let BCC off the hook for their delay (first time).
Why not support BRFC in their efforts to move forward instead of blaming them for mistakes? I’d say they have done their best by employing reputable professionals and tried (expected) to press on quicker.
I think the stand is looking good, especially as it’s temporary. Please stop making suggestions without checking why they won’t work - we seem to be going over the same ground time after time. Things are being done, people are doing their best and if it’s not good enough they will be replaced. The new ownership (that still includes Wael) will see to that.
The football at The Mem is improving as well! It’s a shame The Mem isn’t sustainable but I don’t see how it can be and BRFC have been telling us so for a long long time, even before the Al Qadi takeover.
|
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Oct 5, 2023 12:10:57 GMT
Interesting. Where did it say this about the comment count? I cant imagine this small stand in BS7 got as many comments as most other developments in Bristol or the UK. If they can build a mosque on the edge of Soho, I'm sure a small sports stand can get through in BS7! There is no football club in the UK who have faced this level of objections from local lobbyists. The massive cricket ground revamp including the gigantic stands recieved less objections . The Ashton gate revamp recieved less . Even the complete Ashton Vale new build recieved less. I made no apology in saying the Green Party have supported every single protest group .They are very powerful holding both local political power and social privileges. As a club / organisation we are only human. The club are under introspection and challenged in every decision they made. People don't realise that if a powerful group of lobbyist are continuing to scrutinise every plan . This feels both exhausting and disempowering. Imagine if the same was done to another community group or social organisation?. In regards to Bristolians posting positive comments on behalf of the club. I suggest if it goes to planning then we as supporters need to repeat the exercise all over again. Sadly once again we need to fight the lobbyist and write to the council and councillors. As I stated we have made mistakes. But anyone would if they are under investigation introspection and challenge. It's so sad many see the club as a hinderance instead of helping and working alongside to get a resolution. Put it another way. What evidence is there in 25 years that the Greens have supported us or the local lobbyist ?. I could list many statements the Greens supporting Trash Horfield Rose F.O .M.S and now this. It's ironic that once they win battles ( I never underestimated there protest skill). They are now conveying a message of co-operation and engagement. Your first sentence must be a wild and dramatic guess. Fair play if you've researched every stadium revamp and build in the UK over the past 30 years, but I doubt you have. That comments page had a few hundred letters on it. That's nothing in a city of 500k. |
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Oct 5, 2023 12:11:10 GMT
We as fans need to be very careful. One of the reasons given for calling it in is the number of comments. If Rovers fans start flooding the application again, there is a chance we would be giving her that reason again. Interesting. Where did it say this about the comment count?I cant imagine this small stand in BS7 got as many comments as most other developments in Bristol or the UK. If they can build a mosque on the edge of Soho, I'm sure a small sports stand can get through in BS7! I saw it here: www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/huge-support-bristol-rovers-plan-8677192"In theory, calling in an application to be decided by councillors rather than officers should have little impact on the time it takes to gain permission." "There have been 200+’comments on the application, it’s reasonable to call it in." Maybe I have misinterpreted it, but I think they are saying that due to the number of comments that is one of the reason why it was put to councillors, rather than just the planning office. |
|
|
|
Post by olskooltoteender on Oct 5, 2023 12:12:37 GMT
No, but if you read carefully you'll see that that particular meeting included building control and the planning department.
Your link was to the same document and the quote I provided is on the last page. This Design and Access Statement was submitted with the planning application - so the meeting indicated happened before submitting the planning application. I understand that there was other engagement between club, designers and the planning department before, but you were asking for evidence.
Yes, I used the quote to find the link. I thought I'd post the link for anyone else who wanted to read it. I still don't think this is the same as getting "planning officer's advice", but maybe that is just symantics. It's a shame that the original documents have been taken down, it would be good to compare and contrast to the original one. Maybe there is a small detail in the 2nd one that we wouldn't see as being a big issue, but was missing from the first. It could be something as simple as drainage. Maybe there isn't. If anyone does have the documents, it would be great for them to be pinned to the thread somehow. *Semantics* Oh, the irony. . . 😁 |
|
|
|
Post by seanclevedongas on Oct 5, 2023 12:23:56 GMT
There is no football club in the UK who have faced this level of objections from local lobbyists. The massive cricket ground revamp including the gigantic stands recieved less objections . The Ashton gate revamp recieved less . Even the complete Ashton Vale new build recieved less. I made no apology in saying the Green Party have supported every single protest group .They are very powerful holding both local political power and social privileges. As a club / organisation we are only human. The club are under introspection and challenged in every decision they made. People don't realise that if a powerful group of lobbyist are continuing to scrutinise every plan . This feels both exhausting and disempowering. Imagine if the same was done to another community group or social organisation?. In regards to Bristolians posting positive comments on behalf of the club. I suggest if it goes to planning then we as supporters need to repeat the exercise all over again. Sadly once again we need to fight the lobbyist and write to the council and councillors. As I stated we have made mistakes. But anyone would if they are under investigation introspection and challenge. It's so sad many see the club as a hinderance instead of helping and working alongside to get a resolution. Put it another way. What evidence is there in 25 years that the Greens have supported us or the local lobbyist ?. I could list many statements the Greens supporting Trash Horfield Rose F.O .M.S and now this. It's ironic that once they win battles ( I never underestimated there protest skill). They are now conveying a message of co-operation and engagement. Your first sentence must be a wild and dramatic guess. Fair play if you've researched every stadium revamp and build in the UK over the past 30 years, but I doubt you have. That comments page had a few hundred letters on it. That's nothing in a city of 500k. 707K |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 5, 2023 12:39:11 GMT
Interesting. Where did it say this about the comment count?I cant imagine this small stand in BS7 got as many comments as most other developments in Bristol or the UK. If they can build a mosque on the edge of Soho, I'm sure a small sports stand can get through in BS7! I saw it here: www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/huge-support-bristol-rovers-plan-8677192"In theory, calling in an application to be decided by councillors rather than officers should have little impact on the time it takes to gain permission." "There have been 200+’comments on the application, it’s reasonable to call it in." Maybe I have misinterpreted it, but I think they are saying that due to the number of comments that is one of the reason why it was put to councillors, rather than just the planning office. Comments or objections? Edit: Read the link, it's 200 objections and 600 in support. |
|
|
|
Post by curlywurly on Oct 5, 2023 12:44:27 GMT
There’s an awful lot of wasted words and effort on here! Well done those with the patience to prove what we were told at the beginning that we had talked with all the official bodies before submission. We were probably a bit naïve expecting a smooth ride but in planning terms this is a “can not be refused” scheme imho. If we had to go to Appeal we would almost certainly be awarded costs as well. I’m hoping we are being a bit cleverer now by resubmitting with no possible points of objection left and enough (particularly green) points changed for locals to claim victory and we have let BCC off the hook for their delay (first time). Why not support BRFC in their efforts to move forward instead of blaming them for mistakes? I’d say they have done their best by employing reputable professionals and tried (expected) to press on quicker. I think the stand is looking good, especially as it’s temporary. Please stop making suggestions without checking why they won’t work - we seem to be going over the same ground time after time. Things are being done, people are doing their best and if it’s not good enough they will be replaced. The new ownership (that still includes Wael) will see to that. The football at The Mem is improving as well! It’s a shame The Mem isn’t sustainable but I don’t see how it can be and BRFC have been telling us so for a long long time, even before the Al Qadi takeover. I sort of agree, but I see no harm in people exploring new ideas for the development of the ground and facilities. My experience in the real world is that even ideas that won't work can be valuable in stimulating new though in the art of the possible. This is a forum. It has no real weight, other than a debating platform.
On your last point, I still see that being open for debate. Ways of enhancing non match day income need to continuously be explored because it will still be a long time before we move - if we ever do. Incremental development of facilities at the mem that increase overall income will likely be more cost effective than doing it in a new ground - particularly if we need to share the income with the developer.
|
|
|
|
Post by bravosierraseven on Oct 5, 2023 12:50:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by heartofgas on Oct 5, 2023 13:16:06 GMT
Just a thought, we better get going on the planning permission for the North stand now. At least we have learnt a few things from the south stand process.
|
|
|
|
Post by olskooltoteender on Oct 5, 2023 13:19:00 GMT
We as fans need to be very careful. One of the reasons given for calling it in is the number of comments. If Rovers fans start flooding the application again, there is a chance we would be giving her that reason again. Interesting. Where did it say this about the comment count? I cant imagine this small stand in BS7 got as many comments as most other developments in Bristol or the UK. If they can build a mosque on the edge of Soho, I'm sure a small sports stand can get through in BS7! IIRC, the Green councillor called-in the application before the majority of supporting comments went on, not after . . . |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Oct 5, 2023 13:48:28 GMT
Your first sentence must be a wild and dramatic guess. Fair play if you've researched every stadium revamp and build in the UK over the past 30 years, but I doubt you have. That comments page had a few hundred letters on it. That's nothing in a city of 500k. 707K Tbf, there are a few different pop figures for bristol depending on what version you want to take notice of. |
|
|
|
Post by bluesky on Oct 5, 2023 13:55:30 GMT
City and county of Bristol 450K Greater Bristol 707K
|
|
