Bristol City & Sainsburys; Marches & Petitions

[NickJ]

OK I haven't paid much attention to the new stadium thing because while I have accepted it will happen I don't actually want it. So I'm short on the detail of the thing and more than ready to be shot down by pedants and the bigger is better brigade. Provided the arguments are convincing.

My question - isn't there a solution to please everybody in the long term.

1. Sainsburys apply for planning at Ashton Vale.

2. Sell Ashton Vale to Sainsburys.

3. Play a season at say the Gas, Swindon or even Reading while AG is demolished and rebuilt into a new 30/40,000 stadium or whatever. Preferably not a naming rights bowl.

By my reckoning the season loss of income from lower support would be relatively small in relation to the overall cost and anyway Sainsburys might pay more for the slightly out of town Ashton Vale location.

Steve still gets to build his new stadium, but instead of the embarrassing and soul-destroying Derby County type scenario of the home "pub" being a Frank & Bennys, we stay in our BS3 heartland, near our traditional pre-match meeting places and watering holes.

Without getting into the nitty gritty and ignoring World Cups, is there a fundamental reason why that couldn't work?

[Nibor]

Two fundamental ones at least:

1) A supermarket won't get planning permission on green belt.

2) Re-developing Ashton Gate is a financially disastrous idea.

[NickJ]

Two fundamental ones at least:

1) A supermarket won't get planning permission on green belt.

2) Re-developing Ashton Gate is a financially disastrous idea.

Thanks for the instantaneous reply its almost like you were reading over my shoulder anyway

1) Why not, there is currently planning for a football stadium and more so its no longer green belt?

2) Obviously not as Sainsburys plan on doing exactly that.

[Nibor]

Thanks for the instantaneous reply its almost like you were reading over my shoulder anyway

1) Why not, there is currently planning for a football stadium and more so its no longer green belt?

2) Obviously not as Sainsburys plan on doing exactly that.

1) No, it is still green belt and the only reason we got planning was because we proved there were no other suitable sites on non greenbelt. Since the supermarket has about a quarter the footprint that is not an argument they can make.

2) I must have missed something but Sainsbury's intend on demolishing Ashton Gate not developing it into a 30,000 seater stadium which given the inaccessibility of the site and lack of room for non matchday facilities would be a ruinous move.

You know all this anyway you're just pissed, so g'nite

[NickJ]

1) No, it is still green belt and the only reason we got planning was because we proved there were no other suitable sites on non greenbelt. Since the supermarket has about a quarter the footprint that is not an argument they can make.

2) I must have missed something but Sainsbury's intend on demolishing Ashton Gate not developing it into a 30,000 seater stadium which given the inaccessibility of the site and lack of room for non matchday facilities would be a ruinous move.

You know all this anyway you're just pissed, so g'nite

Unfortunately I havent had a single drink all night as I've just finished work having a lot to catch up following a lengthy holiday and no, I dont know, thats why Im asking the question.

1) Is it really true we only got planning for the reason you say, that doesnt sound a good or logical reason. Surely the council would have just said well, stay at AG if there is no other suitable site, rather than allow Green Belt to be used. If planning policy really is that potentially flexible then allowing Sainsburys to build there must be a possibility. Is there a person working in this field that can aswer this question?

2) Yes Sainsburys intend to demolish and my original suggestion is we also demolish, not develop. How is the site inaccessible and why is not possible to incorporate non match day facilities into a new stadium at Ashton Gate?

So far as I can see company A were going to buy Plot of Land A from company B, demolish building A on Plot of Land A and construct building B. Company B were going to construct building C on Plot of Land B.

Under my proposal company A would buy Plot of Land B from company B and construct building B, while company B could demolish building A on Plot of Land A and construct on it building C.

Could that happen?

[Mikee Freedom]

Unfortunately I havent had a single drink all night as I've just finished work having a lot to catch up following a lengthy holiday and no, I dont know, thats why Im asking the question.

1) Is it really true we only got planning for the reason you say, that doesnt sound a good or logical reason. Surely the council would have just said well, stay at AG if there is no other suitable site, rather than allow Green Belt to be used. If planning policy really is that potentially flexible then allowing Sainsburys to build there must be a possibility. Is there a person working in this field that can aswer this question?

2) Yes Sainsburys intend to demolish and my original suggestion is we also demolish, not develop. How is the site inaccessible and why is not possible to incorporate non match day facilities into a new stadium at Ashton Gate?

So far as I can see company A were going to buy Plot of Land A from company B, demolish building A on Plot of Land A and construct building B. Company B were going to construct building C on Plot of Land B.

Under my proposal company A would buy Plot of Land B from company B and construct building B, while company B could demolish building A on Plot of Land A and construct on it building C.

Could that happen?

In reguards to building a 30 thousand seat stadium on the existing Ashton Gate site with a view to it being a 42 thousand seat stadium if the 2018 bid comes to England has already be said that Ashton Gate is not big enough to Build that sort of size stadium with car park facilities aswell so re development of a proposed 42 thousand seat stadium at Ashton Gate would deffinatly not be viable. It is a shame to see the old stadium go but for the long term future it will prove to go down in Bristols History as one of the best things in history to happen to Bristol but i do here your view but it just wouldnt be possible...

[elhombrecito]

still gets to build his new stadium, but instead of the embarrassing and soul-destroying Derby County type scenario of the home "pub" being a Frank & Bennys, we stay in our BS3 heartland, near our traditional pre-match meeting places and watering holes.

As opposed to being a mere few hundred metres away you mean?

[Nibor]

Unfortunately I havent had a single drink all night as I've just finished work having a lot to catch up following a lengthy holiday and no, I dont know, thats why Im asking the question.

Sorry, my sarcasm detector must be misfiring. I really am surprised you're not aware of this as it's come up lots of times.

1) Is it really true we only got planning for the reason you say, that doesnt sound a good or logical reason. Surely the council would have just said well, stay at AG if there is no other suitable site, rather than allow Green Belt to be used. If planning policy really is that potentially flexible then allowing Sainsburys to build there must be a possibility. Is there a person working in this field that can aswer this question?

It really is true, and no, Sainsbury's can't build there.

"In the report to committee in November your officers came to the view

that the benefits of the stadium were significant enough to conclude that there are very special

circumstances to clearly outweigh the harm to the green belt."

http://www.bristol.g...set_id=33300171

You can also see the alternative sites assessment here.

The Ashton Gate site is about half the acreage of the new site. It is big enough for a supermarket, though they are having to plan underground parking.

It is not big enough for a 30k - 42k stadium plus all the additional facilities, the revenue from which are a key business driver for a new stadium. Nor does it offer the opportunity for all the adjoined developments that financially support the whole project (like the housing).

2) Yes Sainsburys intend to demolish and my original suggestion is we also demolish, not develop. How is the site inaccessible and why is not possible to incorporate non match day facilities into a new stadium at Ashton Gate?

Space, or lack thereof. Access roads surround not sufficient for 30,000 people in one burst.

Could that happen?

Absolutely not.

[NickJ]

As opposed to being a mere few hundred metres away you mean?

Didnt really expect an attempted sarcastic smart arse reply from a mod but yes thats what I mean although in fact the walking distance from Ashton Gate to the new stadium site is in fact almost a mile.

Which makes the majority of the pre-match pubs frequented by City fans almost a mile further away than they are now and therefore realistically out of walking range.

[NickJ]

Sorry, my sarcasm detector must be misfiring. I really am surprised you're not aware of this as it's come up lots of times.

To quote my very first sentence:

OK I haven't paid much attention to the new stadium thing because while I have accepted it will happen I don't actually want it. So I'm short on the detail of the thing and more than ready to be shot down by pedants and the bigger is better brigade.

[CiderHider]

So what's going on? Is the stadium getting built or not?

I just need to know who's cocking it up for us and why, that way I can focus my anger toward a specify target..

[City Chuds]

The simple answer is size - I dont know if you have been to the gate recently but unless you are planning on a multi story pitch (which in the circumstances of most people on here being depressed that we are going to be relegated, could give us the home advantage if we practice playing football up and down stairs!!) You cant fit a 30 to 40,000 seater stadium on the site.

Why dont you want this stadium? and before you think im going to be the one who gives sarcastic replies to your answer or think im bullying you into it im not im interested to know. I love the gate but its not our future and a city the size of Bristol deserves a facility this size IMO

[Nibor]

To quote my very first sentence:

OK I haven't paid much attention to the new stadium thing because while I have accepted it will happen I don't actually want it. So I'm short on the detail of the thing and more than ready to be shot down by pedants and the bigger is better brigade.

I didn't really pay much attention to your first sentence....

I wouldn't have thought that understanding that re-developing the existing stadium isn't viable was mere detail, particularly for someone opposed to moving who has asked some quite in depth questions about the business setup in the past.

In any case, the info is all linked if you're interested.

[Kid in the Riot]

Unfortunately I havent had a single drink all night as I've just finished work having a lot to catch up following a lengthy holiday and no, I dont know, thats why Im asking the question.

1) Is it really true we only got planning for the reason you say, that doesnt sound a good or logical reason. Surely the council would have just said well, stay at AG if there is no other suitable site, rather than allow Green Belt to be used. If planning policy really is that potentially flexible then allowing Sainsburys to build there must be a possibility. Is there a person working in this field that can aswer this question?

The stadium got planning permission at Ashton Vale (in the Green Belt) due to 'very special circumstances', namely the region-wide benefits that a proposed stadium would bring to the area. This was principally based on bringing the World Cup to Bristol.

It would be EXTREMELY difficult to argue 'very special circumstances' to allow a Sainsburys to be plonked in the Green Belt. What would be the reasons to allow it, that would outweigh the harm the proposal would cause to the Green Belt? In addition, as you state the site is pretty much a mile away from Ashton Gate. To position a supermarket here would be in a VERY unsustainable location with it being further from the residential areas of South Bristol with an even higher reliance on the use of private car for customers. In short, it's a totally unsuitable location for a supermarket.

Even if you tried to justify it through 'enabling development' to enable the redevelopment of Ashton Gate, this would be considered a tenuous arguement in planning terms.

The decision to move from Ashton Gate is purely a business decision. In an ideal world we'd all love to stay at a redeveloped AG. However, the existing site IS constrained by its size and access. We need to move in order to progress as a football club and afford the wages of the likes of Stead. That's certainly what I feel, but clearly that's a separate arguement all together...

[City Chuds]

The stadium got planning permission at Ashton Vale (in the Green Belt) due to 'very special circumstances', namely the region-wide benefits that a proposed stadium would bring to the area. This was principally based on bringing the World Cup to Bristol.

It would be EXTREMELY difficult to argue 'very special circumstances' to allow a Sainsburys to be plonked in the Green Belt. What would be the reasons to allow it, that would outweigh the harm the proposal would cause to the Green Belt? In addition, as you state the site is pretty much a mile away from Ashton Gate. To position a supermarket here would be in a VERY unsustainable location with it being further from the residential areas of South Bristol with an even higher reliance on the use of private car for customers. In short, it's a totally unsuitable location for a supermarket.

Even if you tried to justify it through 'enabling development' to enable the redevelopment of Ashton Gate, this would be considered a tenuous arguement in planning terms.

The decision to move from Ashton Gate is purely a business decision. In an ideal world we'd all love to stay at a redeveloped AG. However, the existing site IS constrained by its size and access. We need to move in order to progress as a football club and afford the wages of the likes of Stead. That's certainly what I feel, but clearly that's a separate arguement all together...

You were doing so well with reasoned argument and it all went horribly wrong.

[Kid in the Riot]

You were doing so well with reasoned argument and it all went horribly wrong.

Go on then...

[CiderHider]

Start here CH...My link

simon@

simonrayner.org

What kind of conceited **** has their name as a .org? What a ******, I hate him already. Cant believe the reason he gave for it.....after reading further, what a little turd. Co2 emitions, oh please... Typical lib dem head in the clouds to$$er, totally fails to see beyond his own misguided set of principles, what an utter peace of cat shit. This will not end here.

[NickJ]

The simple answer is size - I dont know if you have been to the gate recently but unless you are planning on a multi story pitch (which in the circumstances of most people on here being depressed that we are going to be relegated, could give us the home advantage if we practice playing football up and down stairs!!) You cant fit a 30 to 40,000 seater stadium on the site.

Why dont you want this stadium? and before you think im going to be the one who gives sarcastic replies to your answer or think im bullying you into it im not im interested to know. I love the gate but its not our future and a city the size of Bristol deserves a facility this size IMO

Planning permission exists for a 32,000 stadium at AG so clearly a 30,00+ is possible and furthermore I would think that starting with a clear site the stadium could be built to include other facilities for additional revenue.

Aa a fan with an interest in the traditions of football as a sport rather than a business, and having been to most of the new lifeless bowls Middlesborough, Southampton, Coventry, Reading, Derby, Leicester, mostly set in or near business parks making football a drive through experience surrounded by homogenous chain multiples rather than the local pub and chippy. I dont like what I see.

I'm not fan of a city the size of Bristol, I'm a fan of Bristol City, there is a difference.

I'm ready for the inevitable flak from those with a supposedly superior football-business brain than mine but you asked, so I answered.

[Dollymarie]

Can we watch what we say on here, regardless of opinion, i'd hate for the forum to be slapped with any lawsuits especially as people are looking for any excuse to deflect from the happenings last week

[City Chuds]

Planning permission exists for a 32,000 stadium at AG so clearly a 30,00+ is possible and furthermore I would think that starting with a clear site the stadium could be built to include other facilities for additional revenue.

Aa a fan with an interest in the traditions of football as a sport rather than a business, and having been to most of the new lifeless bowls Middlesborough, Southampton, Coventry, Reading, Derby, Leicester, mostly set in or near business parks making football a drive through experience surrounded by homogenous chain multiples rather than the local pub and chippy. I dont like what I see.

I'm not fan of a city the size of Bristol, I'm a fan of Bristol City, there is a difference.

I'm ready for the inevitable flak from those with a supposedly superior football-business brain than mine but you asked, so I answered.

My wife says that when im in trouble

[Barrs Court Red]

Planning permission exists for a 32,000 stadium at AG so clearly a 30,00+ is possible and furthermore I would think that starting with a clear site the stadium could be built to include other facilities for additional revenue.

Aa a fan with an interest in the traditions of football as a sport rather than a business, and having been to most of the new lifeless bowls Middlesborough, Southampton, Coventry, Reading, Derby, Leicester, mostly set in or near business parks making football a drive through experience surrounded by homogenous chain multiples rather than the local pub and chippy. I dont like what I see.

I'm not fan of a city the size of Bristol, I'm a fan of Bristol City, there is a difference.

I'm ready for the inevitable flak from those with a supposedly superior football-business brain than mine but you asked, so I answered.

Ashton Gate can't make the money on non matchdays. What's so hard to understand?

[NickJ]

Ashton Gate can't make the money on non matchdays. What's so hard to understand?

My question was whether the stadium or similar proposed for Ashton Vale could instead be built at Ashton Gate. What's so hard to understand?

[Kid in the Riot]

Planning permission exists for a 32,000 stadium at AG

No it doesn't

[CiderHider]

Can we watch what we say on here, regardless of opinion, i'd hate for the forum to be slapped with any lawsuits especially as people are looking for any excuse to deflect from the happenings last week

Nothing libellous or deforming in my post

But let it be known I take full responsibility for my own actions on otib. My previous post was an observation based information available. I stand completely by that post. but meh, if this philistine feels hurt by the nasty men talking about him then feel free to remove it, I just spam it to his email every day instead....nah just joking. ....no really i will.

Don't worry Dolls, he must know how unpopular he is, he would need to be pretty neive to think otherwise. If he thinks being a councillor is a cushy number and he does not have to answer to the people shouting their opinions then he's very much mistaken, and in the wrong job!

[Barrs Court Red]

My question was whether the stadium or similar proposed for Ashton Vale could instead be built at Ashton Gate. What's so hard to understand?

The Ashton Vale project wont fit into the Ashton Gate site. Abit of a no brainer really. But you're an educated man and already know this. Why you need to play the pendant I don't know.

[Nibor]

Planning permission exists for a 32,000 stadium at AG so clearly a 30,00+ is possible and furthermore I would think that starting with a clear site the stadium could be built to include other facilities for additional revenue.

Do you have anything to base that on other than just a feeling because the Ashton Gate site is half the size and the planning experts seem to think you are talking out of your hat?

Look at how the project is being funded - a large part comes from the value of the bits around the stadium (housing and office space) that can't be built on the Ashton Gate site.

We'd end up spending far more for less revenue and more debt.

Aa a fan with an interest in the traditions of football as a sport rather than a business, and having been to most of the new lifeless bowls Middlesborough, Southampton, Coventry, Reading, Derby, Leicester, mostly set in or near business parks making football a drive through experience surrounded by homogenous chain multiples rather than the local pub and chippy. I dont like what I see.

I'm not fan of a city the size of Bristol, I'm a fan of Bristol City, there is a difference.

Yeah, well. Time marches on. It would be nicer to be in the same location but not at the price of limiting the potential of the club.

I'll happily pay the price of a little nostalgia to watch better football and see my team in the top flight with a realistic chance of staying there.

Do you think a complete demolish and rebuild job on the current site would somehow yield a stadium that gives you a different feel to any of those other new ones?

I'm ready for the inevitable flak from those with a supposedly superior football-business brain than mine but you asked, so I answered.

So you're playing ignorant and then having a pre-emptive dig at anyone that tries to help you understand?

[BCFC_Dan]

Don't forget the height restrictions around Ashton Gate. The Atyeo couldn't be built any higher than it is because it would block light to the adjoining houses. Even if the new stadium plus the required facilities (which I believe include a hotel, though I could be wrong on that) and car parking could be fitted into the site, I imagine they'd have to build close to the houses and would fall foul of the same issues. It would also undoubtedly be more expensive to squeeze everything in there than to build at Ashton Vale.

[NickJ]

[BCAGFC]

I'm not playing ignorant, I don't have time for games, I didn't know the answer, that's why I asked. You and a couple of others have helpfully provided information, for which I am thankful.

A couple however – lets name names Stucider and Moomin - were able to offer only the lowest form of wit. Hence the pre-emptive strike as you put it – one of the predictable aspects to this forum is the likelihood of inane responses to contrary views.

I have read the document in your link in a previous post, attempting to demonstrate why Sainsbury cant build at Ashton Vale. The comment you have highlighted is made in the context of whether it is justified to waive normal planning constraints due to the financial viability of the scheme, as opposed to whether a special case is being made for a football stadium. I don't think therefore that that document specifically precludes the possibility of a Sainsburys at Ashton Vale. No doubt the might of the Sainsburys professional team would no doubt find compelling other reasons for a superstore, if they wanted to. But hey.

I wasn't asking whether it was possible to put man on the moon, just whether building a stadium at Ashton Gate was an option. The correct answer, obviously, is that of course it is. Particularly in view of the fact that according to Steve he can't afford the new stadium at Ashton Vale if he can't sell Ashton Gate to Sainsburys.

It would seem size of the site is the main reason for justifying Ashton Vale over Ashton Gate, in order to provide other facilities.

Wolverhampton Wanderers and Norwich City among others have for example developed their grounds on sites smaller than Ashton Gate in recent seasons. Does that mean you expect them to be unable to compete with us financially once our new bowl is built?

Hello councillor Rayner , how are you tonight?.

Seriously though Nick, you are an educated man, use some of it.

BCAGFC

[BCFC_Dan]

I wasn't asking whether it was possible to put man on the moon, just whether building a stadium at Ashton Gate was an option. The correct answer, obviously, is that of course it is. Particularly in view of the fact that according to Steve he can't afford the new stadium at Ashton Vale if he can't sell Ashton Gate to Sainsburys.

Steve can afford it. He's loaded. The football club can't, however, and we don't want to be in a situation where the club is playing at a stadium largely or wholly owned by a private individual.

I'm not sure why you think it would be cheaper to develop at Ashton Gate than Ashton Vale. Greenfield sites are always cheaper to build on than brownfield, and developing on a large area with no constraints is cheaper than in a confined space. They could, I suppose, build something smaller at Ashton Gate without all the extra facilities but that seems like a pointless exercise in throwing money away, as it is the extra income from these facilities that the club needs.

The way you write makes it sound like you think Steve Lansdown has either missed something blindingly obvious or looked at his options and thought "no, I won't have this cheaper option that makes planning more simple and keep the club at its spiritual home, I'll go for this large, expensive and complicated scheme of relocation just for the sheer hell of it". Does that really strike you as likely? Lansdown's not infallible but I think he's a damned sight smarter than you're giving him credit for. Building the new stadium at Ashton Gate has been investigated and it is not an option.