|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 30, 2023 15:44:08 GMT
"Granted, based on the current state of the structure, rejection would've led to serious complications."
Does that mean starting it before approval actually benefited the planning application?
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 30, 2023 15:45:03 GMT
I think you've mis understood my question. I was wondering why this went straight to committee, rather than being called in like thr last one. You in particular were very angry at councillor Edwards for calling it in, but now are insisting it goes to committee. P.s I know I'm being a sh** stirring git so feel free to tell me to f**k off 👍 Can I do it? Wait your turn. 🤭
|
|
yattongas
Proper Gas
Posts: 14,919
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 30, 2023 15:47:13 GMT
"Granted, based on the current state of the structure, rejection would've led to serious complications." Does that mean starting it before approval actually benefited the planning application? Visionary!
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 30, 2023 15:51:07 GMT
"Granted, based on the current state of the structure, rejection would've led to serious complications." Does that mean starting it before approval actually benefited the planning application? Visionary! That's why I was asking, Rovers were vilified by some for starting first and being disrespectful, etc. In the end, did it really help approval and speed up the build process or is it more luck than judgement? Not that I'm taking this news for granted or suggesting we should repeat it, just wondering.
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Oct 30, 2023 15:51:10 GMT
Because committee is made up of political parties . And I'm sad to say I have NO faith in one particular party in voting to support us. Therefore: I urge people which I will to target Labour & Tories councillors to get this over the line. I do have good knowledge in local politics !. I think you've mis understood my question. I was wondering why this went straight to committee, rather than being called in like thr last one. You in particular were very angry at councillor Edwards for calling it in, but now are insisting it goes to committee. P.s I know I'm being a sh** stirring git so feel free to tell me to f**k off 👍 Firstly we don't know if the Greens will ' call it in ' because the Greens silence is open to interpretation ?. Secondly : we don't know what way the Greens will vote on the committee as they have big support in the locality ? Thirdly : history is central to people experiences . What I am suggesting is we target Labour & Tories as they been very supportive and always backed our plans both historically and I believe going forward. Its up to the Greens now to decide what they want.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Oct 30, 2023 15:53:14 GMT
So basically all the latest objection and support letters have been a complete waste of time, as if the planning officer recommends approval it's likely to be granted?
|
|
|
Post by curlywurly on Oct 30, 2023 16:04:16 GMT
So basically all the latest objection and support letters have been a complete waste of time, as if the planning officer recommends approval it's likely to be granted? Not really. Comments will form part of the Officer's decision making process - a pretty small part, though.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Trevor B'Sol on Oct 30, 2023 16:13:09 GMT
So basically all the latest objection and support letters have been a complete waste of time, as if the planning officer recommends approval it's likely to be granted? Not true. The report will include ALL relevant material positive points. For instance, the point about Bristol's reputation as a sporting backwater is not one frequently pointed out. Similarly, the point that both Bristol Rugby and BRFC shared the stadium for 18 years between 1996 and 2014 has been downplayed. Traffic and parking issues were much more of a problem then. Don't tell the objectors. Finally, the previous planning consent was for a huge complex. Turning down the South Stand application might lead to a very costly appeal for BCC. The report is partly written but will not be finalised until next week.
|
|
|
Post by tommym9 on Oct 30, 2023 16:34:37 GMT
I think you've mis understood my question. I was wondering why this went straight to committee, rather than being called in like thr last one. You in particular were very angry at councillor Edwards for calling it in, but now are insisting it goes to committee. P.s I know I'm being a sh** stirring git so feel free to tell me to f**k off 👍 Firstly we don't know if the Greens will ' call it in ' because the Greens silence is open to interpretation ?. Secondly : we don't know what way the Greens will vote on the committee as they have big support in the locality ? Thirdly : history is central to people experiences . What I am suggesting is we target Labour & Tories as they been very supportive and always backed our plans both historically and I believe going forward. Its up to the Greens now to decide what they want. I think you've mis understood what's happened here. It's going to committee, because the planning officer has recommended it go. This means it can't be 'called in' as it has already. It's likely to be approved given the planning officer recommends it, plus given the composition of the committee PLUS councilor Edwards saying she would support it given her concerns are mitigated (which I believe they have been with this new application). So we can all go back to our normal lives without wondering what the green party bogeyman is going to do to us next! It's not like we have a huge stadium redevelopment upcoming when we've just watered off all the local residents or anything silly like that 👀
|
|
|
Post by wertongas on Oct 30, 2023 16:37:11 GMT
This ties in with what I have been saying. The club submitted what they were asked to submit by the delagated officer the first time around, but due to demands from the Greens and objecters more reports were required and a seconed application went in even though Cllr Edwards at a meeting with TG said that she expected the application to go through. It would be very difficult for the application to be turned down when planning are partly to blame for the mess, they have not stuck to any of the time lines that are stipulated in local govenments planning guidlines. As I have always maintainted the club did the right thing by going ahead with the work , but they failed to notify local residents that works were commencing and started works earlier and finished later each day than they should have done. If there hadn't been so many comments on the new application it probably would not have needed to go to committtee , but unfortunatly even with all reqeusted reports submitted, we still got objections , with new objections being thought up by local moaners. TG told me that the building is being completed under guidence of Building control, so will be ready for the issue of building certification when completed. All exciting stuff, the stand looks impressive, but i think it will be December before we see it full , now.
|
|
yattongas
Proper Gas
Posts: 14,919
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 30, 2023 16:39:55 GMT
Firstly we don't know if the Greens will ' call it in ' because the Greens silence is open to interpretation ?. Secondly : we don't know what way the Greens will vote on the committee as they have big support in the locality ? Thirdly : history is central to people experiences . What I am suggesting is we target Labour & Tories as they been very supportive and always backed our plans both historically and I believe going forward. Its up to the Greens now to decide what they want. I think you've mis understood what's happened here. It's going to committee, because the planning officer has recommended it go. This means it can't be 'called in' as it has already. It's likely to be approved given the planning officer recommends it, plus given the composition of the committee PLUS councilor Edwards saying she would support it given her concerns are mitigated (which I believe they have been with this new application). So we can all go back to our normal lives without wondering what the green party bogeyman is going to do to us next! It's not like we have a huge stadium redevelopment upcoming when we've just watered off all the local residents or anything silly like that 👀 When the locals realise there’s no point battling with the mighty Gas as they’ll just lose again , they’ll be absolutely no opposition at all for next stages. 20k Mem here we come !
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Oct 30, 2023 17:07:16 GMT
Firstly we don't know if the Greens will ' call it in ' because the Greens silence is open to interpretation ?. Secondly : we don't know what way the Greens will vote on the committee as they have big support in the locality ? Thirdly : history is central to people experiences . What I am suggesting is we target Labour & Tories as they been very supportive and always backed our plans both historically and I believe going forward. Its up to the Greens now to decide what they want. I think you've mis understood what's happened here. It's going to committee, because the planning officer has recommended it go. This means it can't be 'called in' as it has already. It's likely to be approved given the planning officer recommends it, plus given the composition of the committee PLUS councilor Edwards saying she would support it given her concerns are mitigated (which I believe they have been with this new application). So we can all go back to our normal lives without wondering what the green party bogeyman is going to do to us next! It's not like we have a huge stadium redevelopment upcoming when we've just watered off all the local residents or anything silly like that 👀 That's your interpretation in order to support the Greens which you seem to have an agenda to do. What your refusing to answer is the Greens stance on this second application? The Greens stance on the bigger project of redeveloping the stadium ?. Your trying to spin a positive assumption without any knowledge of the Greens decision. How do u know Emma will support this application? Or even the Greens ?. Have they shared that with the local activitist who are still as I talk registering objections ? . And please stop saying I am misunderstanding things It's a little patronising. You seem to identify every other area as being the problem except the party you support. I don't have a problem with the Greens continuing to back locals my problem is the denial. Let's agree to disagree because we will never see eye to eye.
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Oct 30, 2023 17:26:12 GMT
I think you've mis understood what's happened here. It's going to committee, because the planning officer has recommended it go. This means it can't be 'called in' as it has already. It's likely to be approved given the planning officer recommends it, plus given the composition of the committee PLUS councilor Edwards saying she would support it given her concerns are mitigated (which I believe they have been with this new application). So we can all go back to our normal lives without wondering what the green party bogeyman is going to do to us next! It's not like we have a huge stadium redevelopment upcoming when we've just watered off all the local residents or anything silly like that 👀 That's your interpretation in order to support the Greens which you seem to have an agenda to do. What your refusing to answer is the Greens stance on this second application? The Greens stance on the bigger project of redeveloping the stadium ?. Your trying to spin a positive assumption without any knowledge of the Greens decision. How do u know Emma will support this application? Or even the Greens ?. Have they shared that with the local activitist who are still as I talk registering objections . And please stop saying I am misunderstanding things It's a little patronising. You seem to identify every other area as being the problem except the party you support. I don't have a problem with the Greens continuing to back locals my problem is the denial. Let's agree to disagree because we will never see eye to eye. That's not what was being said at all. I don't think you understand what called-in means, but you were outraged by it nevertheless. The Greens prevented it being nodded through by a planning committee and insisted it go to a vote. Nothing unusual there. In response we amended and resubmitted the plans, which seem to have been done properly this time if the news about forthcoming approval is true. The Greens can't block it by themselves. They can vote against it if they choose, in a democracy. It was called in once and it's effectively been called in again. The real point here is that you just cannot tolerate someone objecting to the club's plans, for any reason at all, and you have turned it into a vendetta against anyone who tries to question the application. We all want it to happen and it's annoying when hurdles are raised, but these things happen.
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Oct 30, 2023 17:34:16 GMT
That's your interpretation in order to support the Greens which you seem to have an agenda to do. What your refusing to answer is the Greens stance on this second application? The Greens stance on the bigger project of redeveloping the stadium ?. Your trying to spin a positive assumption without any knowledge of the Greens decision. How do u know Emma will support this application? Or even the Greens ?. Have they shared that with the local activitist who are still as I talk registering objections . And please stop saying I am misunderstanding things It's a little patronising. You seem to identify every other area as being the problem except the party you support. I don't have a problem with the Greens continuing to back locals my problem is the denial. Let's agree to disagree because we will never see eye to eye. That's not what was being said at all. I don't think you understand what called-in means, but you were outraged by it nevertheless. The Greens prevented it being nodded through by a planning committee and insisted it go to a vote. Nothing unusual there. In response we amended and resubmitted the plans, which seem to have been done properly this time if the news about forthcoming approval is true. The Greens can't block it by themselves. They can vote against it if they choose, in a democracy. It was called in once and it's effectively been called in again. The real point here is that you just cannot tolerate someone objecting to the club's plans, for any reason at all, and you have turned it into a vendetta against anyone who tries to question the application. We all want it to happen and it's annoying when hurdles are raised, but these things happen. How have I turned it into a vendetta ?. I am simply asking the question . What way will the Greens vote on the committee ? Have they spoken to the community in the last week and shared their stance ?. If asking this question is causing vendetta on this forum. Then maybe I ought to give it a break for sometime.
|
|
|
Post by heartofgas on Oct 30, 2023 17:41:37 GMT
I think you've mis understood what's happened here. It's going to committee, because the planning officer has recommended it go. This means it can't be 'called in' as it has already. It's likely to be approved given the planning officer recommends it, plus given the composition of the committee PLUS councilor Edwards saying she would support it given her concerns are mitigated (which I believe they have been with this new application). So we can all go back to our normal lives without wondering what the green party bogeyman is going to do to us next! It's not like we have a huge stadium redevelopment upcoming when we've just watered off all the local residents or anything silly like that 👀 When the locals realise there’s no point battling with the mighty Gas as they’ll just lose again , they’ll be absolutely no opposition at all for next stages. 20k Mem here we come ! I'm not sure they'll give up that easily. However if they object with the same objections at each step then it becomes a bit like the boy who cried wolf. They will come across as a bunch of moaners that are never happy
|
|
|
Post by wertongas on Oct 30, 2023 17:44:14 GMT
That's not what was being said at all. I don't think you understand what called-in means, but you were outraged by it nevertheless. The Greens prevented it being nodded through by a planning committee and insisted it go to a vote. Nothing unusual there. In response we amended and resubmitted the plans, which seem to have been done properly this time if the news about forthcoming approval is true. The Greens can't block it by themselves. They can vote against it if they choose, in a democracy. It was called in once and it's effectively been called in again. The real point here is that you just cannot tolerate someone objecting to the club's plans, for any reason at all, and you have turned it into a vendetta against anyone who tries to question the application. We all want it to happen and it's annoying when hurdles are raised, but these things happen. How have I turned it into a vendetta ?. I am simply asking the question . What way will the Greens vote on the committee ? Have they spoken to the community in the last week and shared their stance ?. If asking this question is causing vendetta on this forum. Then maybe I ought to give it a break for sometime. Cllr Edwards expects it to go through , so I presume the Greens are not that opposed to it. The point is this was as much about locals not liking the club being at the Mem as opposing the stand. They used the new stand to get at the club. If the club do everything correctly from the begining next time unfortunatly it will take alot longer to get the East stand completed, could be a long haul.
|
|
|
Post by womble on Oct 30, 2023 18:08:49 GMT
That's not what was being said at all. I don't think you understand what called-in means, but you were outraged by it nevertheless. The Greens prevented it being nodded through by a planning committee and insisted it go to a vote. Nothing unusual there. In response we amended and resubmitted the plans, which seem to have been done properly this time if the news about forthcoming approval is true. The Greens can't block it by themselves. They can vote against it if they choose, in a democracy. It was called in once and it's effectively been called in again. The real point here is that you just cannot tolerate someone objecting to the club's plans, for any reason at all, and you have turned it into a vendetta against anyone who tries to question the application. We all want it to happen and it's annoying when hurdles are raised, but these things happen. How have I turned it into a vendetta ?. I am simply asking the question . What way will the Greens vote on the committee ? Have they spoken to the community in the last week and shared their stance ?. If asking this question is causing vendetta on this forum. Then maybe I ought to give it a break for sometime. Councillors on a planning committee are not allowed to state a position on an application before it has been debated at the actual meeting. To do so would mean being barred from the meeting and replaced by a substitute. The whole idea is that the decision is taken on the merits of the application as presented at the meeting.
|
|
|
Post by tommym9 on Oct 30, 2023 18:09:37 GMT
I think you've mis understood what's happened here. It's going to committee, because the planning officer has recommended it go. This means it can't be 'called in' as it has already. It's likely to be approved given the planning officer recommends it, plus given the composition of the committee PLUS councilor Edwards saying she would support it given her concerns are mitigated (which I believe they have been with this new application). So we can all go back to our normal lives without wondering what the green party bogeyman is going to do to us next! It's not like we have a huge stadium redevelopment upcoming when we've just watered off all the local residents or anything silly like that 👀 That's your interpretation in order to support the Greens which you seem to have an agenda to do. What your refusing to answer is the Greens stance on this second application? The Greens stance on the bigger project of redeveloping the stadium ?. Your trying to spin a positive assumption without any knowledge of the Greens decision. How do u know Emma will support this application? Or even the Greens ?. Have they shared that with the local activitist who are still as I talk registering objections ? . And please stop saying I am misunderstanding things It's a little patronising. You seem to identify every other area as being the problem except the party you support. I don't have a problem with the Greens continuing to back locals my problem is the denial. Let's agree to disagree because we will never see eye to eye. I can't answer a question I don't have an answer to I'm afraid. All I can go on is what's been said in the press by each party and as I read it (and I could be wrong) the greens will support this latest application. That's different to your interpretation and that's fine.
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Oct 30, 2023 18:20:41 GMT
That's your interpretation in order to support the Greens which you seem to have an agenda to do. What your refusing to answer is the Greens stance on this second application? The Greens stance on the bigger project of redeveloping the stadium ?. Your trying to spin a positive assumption without any knowledge of the Greens decision. How do u know Emma will support this application? Or even the Greens ?. Have they shared that with the local activitist who are still as I talk registering objections ? . And please stop saying I am misunderstanding things It's a little patronising. You seem to identify every other area as being the problem except the party you support. I don't have a problem with the Greens continuing to back locals my problem is the denial. Let's agree to disagree because we will never see eye to eye. I can't answer a question I don't have an answer to I'm afraid. All I can go on is what's been said in the press by each party and as I read it (and I could be wrong) the greens will support this latest application. That's different to your interpretation and that's fine. Fair point raised. All I am asking is will the Greens support this new application?. Can uou provide a link that the Greens will support it ?. If you can then excellent that us really good news. Also the local groups are now registering a lot of objections . In defence of me earlier today I never mentioned Emma or the Greens it was you and you did admit you were #hit stiring. You asked why as it gone to committee ?. Then gave a really good answer why it did ( catching me out a little lol). Anyway I'm sure you be celebrating this news tonight and the likelihood of a revamp memorial stadium with a glass of wine!.
|
|
|
Post by tommym9 on Oct 30, 2023 18:26:25 GMT
I can't answer a question I don't have an answer to I'm afraid. All I can go on is what's been said in the press by each party and as I read it (and I could be wrong) the greens will support this latest application. That's different to your interpretation and that's fine. Fair point raised. All I am asking is will the Greens support this new application?. Can uou provide a link that the Greens will support it ?. If you can then excellent that us really good news. Also the local groups are now registering a lot of objections . In defence of me earlier today I never mentioned Emma or the Greens it was you and you did admit you were #hit stiring. You asked why as it gone to committee ?. Then gave a really good answer why it did ( catching me out a little lol). All I'm going on is Edwards previous statements that she will support it if the club do the extra leg work. They have so she should (and by extension the greens). It's all good, I can be a pedant when I want to!
|
|