|
|
Post by olskooltoteender on Aug 6, 2023 19:35:14 GMT
Done
|
|
|
|
Post by wider on Aug 6, 2023 19:44:08 GMT
More people needed to ‘Support’ please. We can’t have too many!
I think the club moved to submit the application as soon as they could but didn’t anticipate how political this would get.
Taking down the old stands at the end of the season was right imo. Demolition did not require PP.
Ground works technically do require PP but many developers proceed as they aren’t visible so usually don’t get objected to. We were naive thinking we could get away with it here.
Even now local consultation might help (but who knows how much has been carried out behind the scenes?).
It might not be possible to re-erect the old stands now as I suspect we have installed the foundations for the new and are ready to erect now (otherwise how would we have ever been ready?). Should we just press on now? Depends on how long before a decision is likely in my mind. 2 weeks I’d wait, 2 months I’d build. I can’t see BCC having enough grounds in planning terms to take it down. If they took enforcement action we could appeal that and “bingo” season over and money in.
|
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Aug 6, 2023 22:42:24 GMT
I've just added comments (and selected Support!)
It's pretty clear to me that this is a modest proposal which in reality will not much affect anyone in the locality but will greatly improve the experience for fans, a great many of whom are locals themselves.
I do think it could have been handled very differently though.
We are giving the objectors what they wanted when they objected to the proposed Sainsbury's store. Namely an enhanced sporting stadium which preserves the Memorial Stadium and its original intentions.
Somehow though, through powering ahead at very late notice, without seemingly consulting anyone local, we've antagonised them and made them object to something they actually want. Or at least want more than what might happen to the Mem one day.
Shot ourselves in the foot here I think, but that doesn't alter my view it's a very worthwhile development for the stadium with minimal effects on local people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Aug 6, 2023 23:19:56 GMT
I've just added comments (and selected Support!) It's pretty clear to me that this is a modest proposal which in reality will not much affect anyone in the locality but will greatly improve the experience for fans, a great many of whom are locals themselves. I do think it could have been handled very differently though. We are giving the objectors what they wanted when they objected to the proposed Sainsbury's store. Namely an enhanced sporting stadium which preserves the Memorial Stadium and its original intentions. Somehow though, through powering ahead at very late notice, without seemingly consulting anyone local, we've antagonised them and made them object to something they actually want. Or at least want more than what might happen to the Mem one day. Shot ourselves in the foot here I think, but that doesn't alter my view it's a very worthwhile development for the stadium with minimal effects on local people. Our neighbours have objected to every planning application that has ever been submitted. When it’s been for an enhanced stadium they’ve objected that it’s an unsuitable site for a stadium. When we have applied for a supermarket so we can move they’ve objected to that and said the site should be preserved as a sports ground! It’s contradictory, and it’s actually self defeating. Because of their constant obstruction to the football club they will one day soon end up with a development on that site that will impact upon them every single day of their lives rather than just 25 to 30 days a year. They will reap what they sew. |
|
|
|
Post by Westy on Aug 7, 2023 0:08:06 GMT
I've just added comments (and selected Support!) It's pretty clear to me that this is a modest proposal which in reality will not much affect anyone in the locality but will greatly improve the experience for fans, a great many of whom are locals themselves. I do think it could have been handled very differently though. We are giving the objectors what they wanted when they objected to the proposed Sainsbury's store. Namely an enhanced sporting stadium which preserves the Memorial Stadium and its original intentions. Somehow though, through powering ahead at very late notice, without seemingly consulting anyone local, we've antagonised them and made them object to something they actually want. Or at least want more than what might happen to the Mem one day. Shot ourselves in the foot here I think, but that doesn't alter my view it's a very worthwhile development for the stadium with minimal effects on local people. Our neighbours have objected to every planning application that has ever been submitted. When it’s been for an enhanced stadium they’ve objected that it’s an unsuitable site for a stadium. When we have applied for a supermarket so we can move they’ve objected to that and said the site should be preserved as a sports ground! It’s contradictory, and it’s actually self defeating. Because of their constant obstruction to the football club they will one day soon end up with a development on that site that will impact upon them every single day of their lives rather than just 25 to 30 days a year. They will reap what they sew. They'd probably object to the mem being torn down and transformed into a solar powered and sustainably designed nature reserve with a free crèche and Starbucks simply because of the work it would require! |
|
|
|
Post by herbertblake on Aug 7, 2023 4:37:41 GMT
I have put details on the Bristol Rovers fans zone & Bristol rovers history groups on Facebook and at least 60 fans have now supported the planning application
Spread the word stop the greens stopping the construction
|
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 7, 2023 4:56:34 GMT
Done.
|
|
|
|
Post by alftimebovril on Aug 7, 2023 8:19:28 GMT
Done
|
|
|
|
Post by jamingas on Aug 7, 2023 8:23:33 GMT
Thank you for this. I commented the following:
This is a clear improvement on the previous infrastructure that was in position at the memorial stadium. This will enhance the stadium, as well as the local area, whilst bringing the stadium capacity back to just above its recent capacity.
The previous stand/s were both aesthetically poor, from personal experience provided poor viewer experience and had questionable health and safety approval.
This proposal resolves this.
It should be noted the memorial stadium has had almost no notable infrastructural improvements to it over the last 20 years, meaning the stadium itself has fallen well short of the standards expected from both home and away spectators (it should not be forgotten that the stadium itself is a representation of both the local area and Bristol as a whole).
The proposal itself is modest in comparison to both the previous infrastructure in place, as well as against most other football league stadia across the country. This results in minimal impact on the local residence whilst hugely improving the stadium for all involved.
|
|
|
|
Post by heartofgas on Aug 7, 2023 9:00:01 GMT
I've just added comments (and selected Support!) It's pretty clear to me that this is a modest proposal which in reality will not much affect anyone in the locality but will greatly improve the experience for fans, a great many of whom are locals themselves.I do think it could have been handled very differently though. We are giving the objectors what they wanted when they objected to the proposed Sainsbury's store. Namely an enhanced sporting stadium which preserves the Memorial Stadium and its original intentions. Somehow though, through powering ahead at very late notice, without seemingly consulting anyone local, we've antagonised them and made them object to something they actually want. Or at least want more than what might happen to the Mem one day. Shot ourselves in the foot here I think, but that doesn't alter my view it's a very worthwhile development for the stadium with minimal effects on local people. This is the point, spot on. It won't really affect anyone locally but make a massive difference to the club. When you put it like that it does seem pathetic their objections to this. Hope BCC see it this way, the benefits far outweigh any negatives (if any exist) |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Aug 7, 2023 9:50:32 GMT
Huge well done to everyone so far, keep it coming! Since the thread started yesterday, 368 supporting comments already!  |
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Aug 7, 2023 9:51:31 GMT
I've just added comments (and selected Support!) It's pretty clear to me that this is a modest proposal which in reality will not much affect anyone in the locality but will greatly improve the experience for fans, a great many of whom are locals themselves.I do think it could have been handled very differently though. We are giving the objectors what they wanted when they objected to the proposed Sainsbury's store. Namely an enhanced sporting stadium which preserves the Memorial Stadium and its original intentions. Somehow though, through powering ahead at very late notice, without seemingly consulting anyone local, we've antagonised them and made them object to something they actually want. Or at least want more than what might happen to the Mem one day. Shot ourselves in the foot here I think, but that doesn't alter my view it's a very worthwhile development for the stadium with minimal effects on local people. This is the point, spot on. It won't really affect anyone locally but make a massive difference to the club. When you put it like that it does seem pathetic their objections to this. Hope BCC see it this way, the benefits far outweigh any negatives (if any exist) Yep, totally bemused that we have taken a structure down without a clear way ahead to replace it knowing that these objections would be incoming, no matter how pathetic we may see them as/ that they actually are. Recent(ish) history should have surely been a pointer to this. |
|
|
|
Post by badengas on Aug 7, 2023 10:08:42 GMT
Huge well done to everyone so far, keep it coming! Since the thread started yesterday, 368 supporting comments already! Good effort counting! |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Aug 7, 2023 10:21:08 GMT
Huge well done to everyone so far, keep it coming! Since the thread started yesterday, 368 supporting comments already! Good effort counting! Copy and paste in excel 😉 |
|
|
|
Post by kruger on Aug 7, 2023 10:22:22 GMT
The nimbys don't want us there but they don't want anything else there either, they don't want a supermarket they don't want a football stadium what the hell do they want, these idiots bought their houses knowing the stadium was there.
|
|
|
|
Post by kernowtoteend on Aug 7, 2023 10:50:18 GMT
Fantastic support level now for the PP. Pity 3 Objections yesterday are in favour of the Plan !!!! Come on - let us get well over a 1,000 in favour....
|
|
|
|
Post by Tilly's Thighs on Aug 7, 2023 11:12:49 GMT
Do you honestly feel it would have made any difference to those now objecting? It's seems certain people that living in the area feel it should stay the same with no major developments, they objected to a Witherspoon's, they objected to a Sainsbury's Superstore and now they are objecting to the new stand. Quite agree, there’s definitely some group in the area stirring things up, over the years they have opposed the following - 1) opposed BRFC redevelopment of the Mem (2008). 2) opposed the Sainsbury’s superstore . 3) opposed Gloucestershire CCC floodlights installation. 4) opposed BRFC redeveloping the South end of the stadium. It would be interesting who is the driving force behind all these campaign’s. Incomers |
|
|
|
Post by islandgas on Aug 7, 2023 11:19:18 GMT
This is the point, spot on. It won't really affect anyone locally but make a massive difference to the club. When you put it like that it does seem pathetic their objections to this. Hope BCC see it this way, the benefits far outweigh any negatives (if any exist) Yep, totally bemused that we have taken a structure down without a clear way ahead to replace it knowing that these objections would be incoming, no matter how pathetic we may see them as/ that they actually are. Recent(ish) history should have surely been a pointer to this. Rovers must have spoken to the Council before they put in the application and must have been assured that planning permission will be forthcoming. I can't think of any other explanation. |
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Aug 7, 2023 11:40:14 GMT
Yep, totally bemused that we have taken a structure down without a clear way ahead to replace it knowing that these objections would be incoming, no matter how pathetic we may see them as/ that they actually are. Recent(ish) history should have surely been a pointer to this. Rovers must have spoken to the Council before they put in the application and must have been assured that planning permission will be forthcoming. I can't think of any other explanation. Well maybe….but not sure how the Council can give that concrete (excuse the pun🤭) assurance upfront prior to any objections/due process and, even if they did, the bit that’s missing from that conversation is ….when?. Given PP once granted is valid for 3 years (I think) what was the rush to put ourselves in this position? |
|
|
|
Post by Gashead73 on Aug 7, 2023 11:50:01 GMT
Done....... and I selected Support!
|
|
