stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,307
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Nov 1, 2023 12:41:44 GMT
If they’re like this for a ‘temporary’ structure what are they going to be like for the East and North stands? Would we submit two separate applications or a combined one? Which is more likely to go through and quicker?
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Nov 1, 2023 13:06:39 GMT
Unless I've missed something this information has been published on the planning application portal for nearly a month now. I read quite a lot of it but missed this part, I guess they have more free time than I do to try and find any weakness... The point I'm making is yes information is available from many sources . However its the substance of information which could get a defferal. If you look at the latest objections they are much more descriptive and challenging than the laughable ones at the beginning. I don't believe this is coincidental. I think this is a last ditch attempt to get it defered. Additionally it's not a one person band !. Of course it is - it's what they did before with the Sainsburys planning application. Despite some evidence to the contrary, the local activists are not idiots - in fact many are well trained in a variety of disciplines which means between them they will read every document and every applicable law/regulation/loophole, before trying to exploit each and every one - and since they are also well coordinated they won't put all their cards on the table at once, we will get as many delays as the legal system allows... ...potentially one reason why Rovers started to build regardless of planning permission - every indication is the initial permission will easily be passed, and with the structure nearly completed now it negates a lot of their potential delaying tactics...
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Nov 1, 2023 13:22:46 GMT
This is my point all along. Its very difficult when you got 300-500 stones being thrown at you every application. They are well versed and orchestrated. This means the club can't put a foot wrong just one mistake could open a legal loophole.
Conversely Bristol City (27000) received 0 objections for the Ashton Gate revamp and Gloucestershire cricket for an international arena a handfall.
I do feel for the club despite our own mistakes which we have made and accepted. It's bloody hard work in life if your constantly challenged scrutinised and not liked by some in the community.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Nov 1, 2023 13:34:55 GMT
This is my point all along. Its very difficult when you got 300-500 stones being thrown at you every application. They are well versed and orchestrated. This means the club can't put a foot wrong just one mistake could open a legal loophole. Conversely Bristol City (27000) received 0 objections for the Ashton Gate revamp and Gloucestershire cricket for an international arena a handfall. I do feel for the club despite our own mistakes which we have made and accepted. It's bloody hard work in life if your constantly challenged scrutinised and not liked by some in the community. Shire had their first PP turned down with Counsellors voting against the advice of Planning Officers, to my knowledge it is the only stadium development turned down by Bristol City Council. Gloucestershire Cricket Club ground plans refused
|
|
|
Post by amgas on Nov 1, 2023 13:36:30 GMT
Helped that most living next to Ashton can't read or write and those that can don't have internet or IT skills :-)
Seems unlikely that not a single person would complain - Stevie gave them all a bung perhaps :-)
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Nov 1, 2023 13:41:01 GMT
This is my point all along. Its very difficult when you got 300-500 stones being thrown at you every application. They are well versed and orchestrated. This means the club can't put a foot wrong just one mistake could open a legal loophole. Conversely Bristol City (27000) received 0 objections for the Ashton Gate revamp and Gloucestershire cricket for an international arena a handfall. I do feel for the club despite our own mistakes which we have made and accepted. It's bloody hard work in life if your constantly challenged scrutinised and not liked by some in the community. Shire had their first PP turned down with Counsellors voting against the advice of Planning Officers, to my knowledge it is the only stadium development turned down by Bristol City Council. Gloucestershire Cricket Club ground plans refusedFirstly it wasn't due to local objections or an orchestrated group opposed to stadium like us that's my point . Secondly have you seen how big the scaled down flats are and how big they would of been ?. The floodlights and flats make our ground look like legoland . The first application by GCCC was to push the boundaries no one expected to go through. I know because I'm a member of GCCC and attended the meetings .
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Nov 1, 2023 13:42:29 GMT
Firstly it wasn't due to local objections or an orchestrated group opposed to stadium like us that's my point . Secondly have you seen how big the scaled down flats are and how big they would of been ?. The floodlights and flats make our ground look like legoland . The first application by GCCC was to push the boundaries no one expected to go through. I know because I'm a member and attended meetings . Same
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Nov 1, 2023 13:46:12 GMT
If they’re like this for a ‘temporary’ structure what are they going to be like for the East and North stands? Would we submit two separate applications or a combined one? Which is more likely to go through and quicker? Benefit of a single application is we can start just one phase of it and then the whole thing is valid. Otherwise we need to do some form of prep work for the other phases too. But the benefit of doing planning apps in phases I guess means that it’ll make objections harder and less risk of failure as you could get one through and focus on refining whatever doesn’t fly.
|
|
|
Post by roversteve on Nov 1, 2023 13:52:45 GMT
I believe that the consultation period has now closed. There are over 400 letters of "support" and under 200 of "objection". Nothing new has come in today and I remember reading that the end of October is the end date for documents to be sent in. Well done to everyone that sent in "support" letters, esp as it all had to done again after the new application went in. I agree, Rovers, learnt their lesson from other dealings with " not so local" residents and pressure groups, the idea being by them was to delay the start of any works and so Rovers did their homework and started the build before planning was granted, all legal and carefully discussed with planners, well done UTG.
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Nov 1, 2023 17:04:26 GMT
This would all have been so much easier if we had consulted and reported in the traditional and required manner for a planning application from the start. Building the thing in defiance of the objections compounded the problems.
We got everyone's backs up and now are being portrayed as the bad guys, understandably in my opinion and presumably in the opinion of the new owners, who tore up the old application and resubmitted. But the damage had already been done.
Not sure why that is so hard for some to see.
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Nov 1, 2023 17:14:32 GMT
This would all have been so much easier if we had consulted and reported in the traditional and required manner for a planning application from the start. Building the thing in defiance of the objections compounded the problems. We got everyone's backs up and now are being portrayed as the bad guys, understandably in my opinion and presumably in the opinion of the new owners, who tore up the old application and resubmitted. But the damage had already been done. Not sure why that is so hard for some to see. Precisely Amateur hour all round.
|
|
|
Post by willytopp84 on Nov 1, 2023 17:35:55 GMT
I know alot of the objections sound like sad little s**theads from when I read them.
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Nov 1, 2023 17:51:45 GMT
I think the club did the right thing to start building . WertonGas said yesterday " That the local objecters dislike the club'. If we work from that basis : what use is it to consult debate and have dialogue?.
The question asked is ' would a long process of consultation change the hearts and minds of the locals ?. Personally I don't think so. In fact I think they would of used the process to stop it in its tracks and use tactics to intimidate the club. The sheer weight of legal talk and challenges by locals could of scared the new owners. I honestly don't say this out of bitterness . I say it because I think the locals are articulate and well organised and I give credit to their local battles against the club.
There as been advocacy work going on to bring about reconciliation but the opposition numbers on protal suggest it will be higher than the first application.
The reality is if the local objectors had there way then there would be no stand and consequently a big question mark over the sustainability of the club. Hindsight is a fine thing. Maybe the locals would of backed it and they could of embraced it like any other community asset. I personally think not !.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 1, 2023 18:48:21 GMT
This would all have been so much easier if we had consulted and reported in the traditional and required manner for a planning application from the start. Building the thing in defiance of the objections compounded the problems. We got everyone's backs up and now are being portrayed as the bad guys, understandably in my opinion and presumably in the opinion of the new owners, who tore up the old application and resubmitted. But the damage had already been done. Not sure why that is so hard for some to see. We did everything by the book on previous applications but we have zero to show for it? What gets me is the protestors want the ground to remain a sports stadium but now we're trying to ensure that it does remain a sports stadium they are now objecting to those plans.
|
|
|
Post by bravosierraseven on Nov 1, 2023 19:39:36 GMT
So the plateau of loose material has been in place for over 100 years, presumably compacting all this time, but we should suddenly become concerned about it now... Also the flood lights seem to be still standing and we had permission to build student accommodation on it.
|
|
|
Post by bravosierraseven on Nov 1, 2023 19:46:01 GMT
This would all have been so much easier if we had consulted and reported in the traditional and required manner for a planning application from the start. Building the thing in defiance of the objections compounded the problems. We got everyone's backs up and now are being portrayed as the bad guys, understandably in my opinion and presumably in the opinion of the new owners, who tore up the old application and resubmitted. But the damage had already been done. Not sure why that is so hard for some to see. We did everything by the book on previous applications but we have zero to show for it? What gets me is the protestors want the ground to remain a sports stadium but now we're trying to ensure that it does remain a sports stadium they are now objecting to those plans. Well they tried the JR route on the Sainsbury plan but it was only the delay which scuppered the deal. These future developments are down to our owners and not any Third parties so we must fight them all the way.
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Nov 2, 2023 8:57:31 GMT
We did everything by the book on previous applications but we have zero to show for it? What gets me is the protestors want the ground to remain a sports stadium but now we're trying to ensure that it does remain a sports stadium they are now objecting to those plans. This is from a blog when the Mem was declared an Asset of Community Value and added to the Bristol Local List in 2016, a decision driven by the local residents/pressure groups/political party who wanted it to remain a sports stadium and (I guess) are a similar group to those now opposing the South Stand: "...The Memorial Stadium is embedded in the local community: around it are people’s homes and gardens; nearby pubs, cafes and food outlets sustain visiting football fans. The sports ground gives character and historical significance to the residential area..." "...The Memorial Stadium (or Memorial Ground) has long been a very special local and city asset, inspiring the city’s youth to take up sport and to lead healthy lives for almost a century. The Memorial Stadium is used by Bristol Rovers FC, one of Bristol’s two professional football clubs, and is a venue for League level football matches. Spectator sport is part of the entertainment industry, and football fans further support the local economy, especially food and drink businesses. Cherished sporting memories of the ‘Mem’ stadium are renewed every season, and woven into the social fabric of the city..." "...The Covenant on the land, explicitly states that it should be used for sport or recreation, for the benefit of the community, in perpetuity. It should be nurtured and protected, allowed to evolve and adapt to a changing world. Sport in built up areas in England is special but declining, due to green spaces being sold off for housing..."
|
|
|
Post by blueridge on Nov 2, 2023 9:14:32 GMT
We did everything by the book on previous applications but we have zero to show for it? What gets me is the protestors want the ground to remain a sports stadium but now we're trying to ensure that it does remain a sports stadium they are now objecting to those plans. This is from a blog when the Mem was declared an Asset of Community Value and added to the Bristol Local List in 2016, a decision driven by the local residents/pressure groups/political party who wanted it to remain a sports stadium and (I guess) are a similar group to those now opposing the South Stand: "...The Memorial Stadium is embedded in the local community: around it are people’s homes and gardens; nearby pubs, cafes and food outlets sustain visiting football fans. The sports ground gives character and historical significance to the residential area..." "...The Memorial Stadium (or Memorial Ground) has long been a very special local and city asset, inspiring the city’s youth to take up sport and to lead healthy lives for almost a century. The Memorial Stadium is used by Bristol Rovers FC, one of Bristol’s two professional football clubs, and is a venue for League level football matches. Spectator sport is part of the entertainment industry, and football fans further support the local economy, especially food and drink businesses. Cherished sporting memories of the ‘Mem’ stadium are renewed every season, and woven into the social fabric of the city..." "...The Covenant on the land, explicitly states that it should be used for sport or recreation, for the benefit of the community, in perpetuity. It should be nurtured and protected, allowed to evolve and adapt to a changing world. Sport in built up areas in England is special but declining, due to green spaces being sold off for housing..." The final paragraph ‘nails it’ - hopefully someone has either submitted it as a Support Statement and/or BCC has this available in their consideration brief.
|
|
|
Post by gassince1957 on Nov 2, 2023 9:48:48 GMT
We did everything by the book on previous applications but we have zero to show for it? What gets me is the protestors want the ground to remain a sports stadium but now we're trying to ensure that it does remain a sports stadium they are now objecting to those plans. This is from a blog when the Mem was declared an Asset of Community Value and added to the Bristol Local List in 2016, a decision driven by the local residents/pressure groups/political party who wanted it to remain a sports stadium and (I guess) are a similar group to those now opposing the South Stand: "...The Memorial Stadium is embedded in the local community: around it are people’s homes and gardens; nearby pubs, cafes and food outlets sustain visiting football fans. The sports ground gives character and historical significance to the residential area..." "...The Memorial Stadium (or Memorial Ground) has long been a very special local and city asset, inspiring the city’s youth to take up sport and to lead healthy lives for almost a century. The Memorial Stadium is used by Bristol Rovers FC, one of Bristol’s two professional football clubs, and is a venue for League level football matches. Spectator sport is part of the entertainment industry, and football fans further support the local economy, especially food and drink businesses. Cherished sporting memories of the ‘Mem’ stadium are renewed every season, and woven into the social fabric of the city..." "...The Covenant on the land, explicitly states that it should be used for sport or recreation, for the benefit of the community, in perpetuity. It should be nurtured and protected, allowed to evolve and adapt to a changing world. Sport in built up areas in England is special but declining, due to green spaces being sold off for housing..." It was not an Asset of Community Value - that was part of the stopping Sainsbury's plans stuff. The land is privately owned (and has been since 1920-ish). When this appeal came in I asked Nick Higgs at a BRSC AGM if this would create a problem selling the site and he confirmed it would not. An Asset of Community Value must have been used on a daily basis by the public WITHOUT needing permission of the landowners (hence the issue when City wanted to build a new stadium a few years back). Seems to me the local objectors will stop at nothing to prevent or delay permission!
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Nov 2, 2023 9:50:12 GMT
This is from a blog when the Mem was declared an Asset of Community Value and added to the Bristol Local List in 2016, a decision driven by the local residents/pressure groups/political party who wanted it to remain a sports stadium and (I guess) are a similar group to those now opposing the South Stand: "...The Memorial Stadium is embedded in the local community: around it are people’s homes and gardens; nearby pubs, cafes and food outlets sustain visiting football fans. The sports ground gives character and historical significance to the residential area..." "...The Memorial Stadium (or Memorial Ground) has long been a very special local and city asset, inspiring the city’s youth to take up sport and to lead healthy lives for almost a century. The Memorial Stadium is used by Bristol Rovers FC, one of Bristol’s two professional football clubs, and is a venue for League level football matches. Spectator sport is part of the entertainment industry, and football fans further support the local economy, especially food and drink businesses. Cherished sporting memories of the ‘Mem’ stadium are renewed every season, and woven into the social fabric of the city..." "...The Covenant on the land, explicitly states that it should be used for sport or recreation, for the benefit of the community, in perpetuity. It should be nurtured and protected, allowed to evolve and adapt to a changing world. Sport in built up areas in England is special but declining, due to green spaces being sold off for housing..." The final paragraph ‘nails it’ - hopefully someone has either submitted it as a Support Statement and/or BCC has this available in their consideration brief. Trouble is it's effectively anonymous blog - no idea who is really behind it, other than they also supported the Asset of Community Value decision and the Bristol Local List addition six/seven years ago. We can all assume that it's a local resident/pressure group that was behind the blog - and we can assume they are now against the new developments, but can't prove it...
|
|