In the Net Posted March 7, 2014 Report Share Posted March 7, 2014 Interesting article on BBC website about two pieces of land which have been stripped of Village Green status. It seems as though people in high places are finally wising up! The article contains a link to the Supreme Court ruling, but I haven't had chance to read it all yet. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26338761 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted March 7, 2014 Report Share Posted March 7, 2014 I think this is certain to happen at AV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcfctim Posted March 7, 2014 Report Share Posted March 7, 2014 I think this is certain to happen at AV. The year the AG redevelopment finishes knowing our luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo88 Posted March 7, 2014 Report Share Posted March 7, 2014 Steve Lansdown will recoup his money by building something else at Ashton Vale. Unfortunately City will have redeveloped Ashton Gate by then into a good ground, but not as good as the Adhton Vale option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arpaul Posted March 7, 2014 Report Share Posted March 7, 2014 Come on Mr Lansdown. One big last push.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 IMO the club should issue a statement and let us know officially that, unfortunately, the hunger for AV is dead. I fear typical BCFC, plenty of ambition but we lack the personnel and expertise to achieve it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolman Block B Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 My thoughts? If Ashton Vale is eventually overturned SL will still build a super stadium for BCFC and BRC will have Ashton Gate all to theirselves!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_eastender Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 IMO the club should issue a statement and let us know officially that, unfortunately, the hunger for AV is dead. I fear typical BCFC, plenty of ambition but we lack the personnel and expertise to achieve it. Sadly it would indeed seem the club have given up on AV and settled for a very much 'second-best' option in redeveloping AG. AV as a village green will undoubtedly get overturned... and covered in housing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fodbarmyarmy Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 As we keep being told the number one priority is AV ,,,,,,,, that has not changed as far as I am aware SL is no fool (despite what some may think on here) and he has enough "High level" contacts to know these turnovers were going to start happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 AV isn't even on the football clubs radar anymore, let alone a priority. It'll end up being a mix of housing and other low denisty buildings. Forever a missed opportunity thanks to a handful of liars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extonsred Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 How about us the fans getting together a public protest / statement? -- and make a statement to the club first, then the city and to whoever it is deemed most likely to make the biggest impression! As others have said -- one last big push........ and we need to be in there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 It's too late. In two months the Ashton Gate rebuild will begin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CITYAREREDANDWHITE Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 This could be linked with the club seeming to be going for the cheaper option with Ashton gate and having the plans amended Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fodbarmyarmy Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 First Phase will begin.... does not mean the rest of it has to follow though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldstandrobin Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 My thoughts? If Ashton Vale is eventually overturned SL will still build a super stadium for BCFC and BRC will have Ashton Gate all to theirselves!!! Wouldnt be at all surprised, saw a van turning up yesterday at the gate and unloading cans of blue paint :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS34Red Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 First Phase will begin.... does not mean the rest of it has to follow thoughThat's my thoughts, I think Ashton Gate will be redeveloped in the short term with the vale the long term target. I can think of a few clubs that have done this, possibly Man City? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 NIMBYS should be renamed NUMPTYS. A lovely stadium and a nature reserve now looks like becoming high density social housing. They've played a blinder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 First Phase will begin.... does not mean the rest of it has to follow though I saw part of an article , which I think was discussed on here , which implied even if the EE redevelopment went ahead they could still go with AV. I think it would be great for the Rugby club and women's team to use the Gate but not sure that would meet with the budget. That said SL could make it work if he wanted to badly enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 I saw part of an article , which I think was discussed on here , which implied even if the EE redevelopment went ahead they could still go with AV. I think it would be great for the Rugby club and women's team to use the Gate but not sure that would meet with the budget. That said SL could make it work if he wanted to badly enough. That would be a very expensive option. The cost of 2 stadiums and no Sainsburys cash. Plus, wouldn't the planning permission of AV be dependent on AG no longer being in existence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS34Red Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 The worst thing is we had planning permission before they applied for TVG, had the new legislation been in force back then they would have been unable to apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverface Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 That would be a very expensive option. The cost of 2 stadiums and no Sainsburys cash. Plus, wouldn't the planning permission of AV be dependent on AG no longer being in existence? weve already got plannng permission so in effect....no. Knowing us though, we'd probably try to build after the planning permission expires!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 weve already got plannng permission so in effect....no. Knowing us though, we'd probably try to build after the planning permission expires!!! I know we've got planning but this is dependant on many factors that would at least assume it was the only stadium. Now, it may not have been considered, as a stupid oversight, but I'd imagine having 2 stadiums in the space of 100 yards will fall foul of parking, traffic, noise plans. Not a single planning document will reference AG still being in existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverface Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 I know we've got planning but this is dependant on many factors that would at least assume it was the only stadium. Now, it may not have been considered, as a stupid oversight, but I'd imagine having 2 stadiums in the space of 100 yards will fall foul of parking, traffic, noise plans. Not a single planning document will reference AG still being in existence. I was under the impression that whilst AV was being built AG was to remain and then get replaced by Sainsburys after AV was active. However I guess if AG remained it would boil down to the council giving the correct licence agreement for use ie. Rugby and football cannot be played the same day. TBH I reckon that residents would prefer AG to remain rather than have a Sainsburys but thats just my opionion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasbuster Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 My thoughts? If Ashton Vale is eventually overturned SL will still build a super stadium for BCFC and BRC will have Ashton Gate all to theirselves!!! Certainly would be my choice. As I have put on previous threads; Bristol Sport believe they will get back their investment into A.G. within 10 years. If this is the case, then I don't believe S.L. will give up on the A.V. stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son of Fred Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 Interesting article on BBC website about two pieces of land which have been stripped of Village Green status. It seems as though people in high places are finally wising up! The article contains a link to the Supreme Court ruling, but I haven't had chance to read it all yet. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26338761 maybe we could move to Frenchay????.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 As it stands, AV is still greenbelt, it was due to be removed from greenbelt until we had a change of government policy. No housing will be allowed to be built there while it remains greenbelt and, there are other sites available for housing developments in the area. There are sufficient allocated housing sites to meet current demands for housing in each authorities local plan. So in effect the only greenbelt development allowed, has to prove extenuating circumstances, such as, the stadium. It proved this because, there was no other site in the area suitable for that planned development, housing would not be allowed. There's nothing to stop a partial redevelopment of AG in the meantime and it makes you wonder why the plans for AG have been cut to the bone, with boxes also removed from the plans. What has Mr Lansdown got to lose, by keeping options open? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDOXO Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 If there is a chance at AV and it remains sensible financially for the club and its major shareholder then I would love SL to go for it!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombsy Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 Lets hope we go ahead and build a new ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 None of it is actually registered as a village green yet is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted March 8, 2014 Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 None of it is actually registered as a village green yet is it? I don't think so, but it's such a grey area, with the general public not knowing much of the finer detail. The TVG supporters would say that it has been registered. I don't believe it has though, because they applied for all of the site and there has not been a conclusion of the case as yet. I believe, there's a whole new inspection currently deferred at the moment. The council tried to register the southern part of the site as a possible compromise deal, then got the boundaries wrong on the site plan, yet the TVG lot still think it's registered even if the boundaries are marked incorrectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.