Monkeh Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 So why have the council suddenly completely flipped and reversed?? I dont get it Because they made a complete hash of it in the first place and are trying to save what little face they have left, If it gets TVG status the council will have to buy the land back off of lansdown which they don't have the money to do, Thats why I think they have stepped aside to let Lansdwon persue with his highly paid london based legal team instead of the crap the council employed, This is what SL wants imho he has the time and money to fight it (Just like brighton did) its a matter of when not if Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akira Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 So why have the council suddenly completely flipped and reversed?? I dont get it This is my biggest WTF aswell. How have the council, who came out a month or so ago STATING in the press, social media etc etc that THEY had won, and that we could pretty much go ahead and build, suddenly lose, tail between their legs, and now have completely changed their minds?!?!?!!? **** me sideways, what on earth are these gimps doing over there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasbuster Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Why would the council have to buy the land from Lansdown - they are under no obligation to do that with tax payers money ? I'd be interested to know the terms of this new deal - on the face of it, with whats been reported, the landowners have given away over 20 acres of land with no guarantee of the other 20 acres being able to be built on. That doesn't add up. There must be something in it for the land owners - or were they not party to the discussions ? I think there's a lot more info to come. Agreed, SL would not give away half his land for nothing.......would he ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Why would the council have to buy the land from Lansdown - they are under no obligation to do that with tax payers money ? I'd be interested to know the terms of this new deal - on the face of it, with whats been reported, the landowners have given away over 20 acres of land with no guarantee of the other 20 acres being able to be built on. That doesn't add up. There must be something in it for the land owners - or were they not party to the discussions ? I think there's a lot more info to come. They sold it to him un the pretense that he can devlop it, I'd have to see the orginal contract between the landowners and the council but I bet bottom dollor there will be a clause in it lansdown would not of over looked that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lichfield eastend Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Didn't S L have a clause written into the original purchase agreement that if the stadium didn't get built the land would be handed back at the same purchase price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kermit the Frog Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Lansdown is a VERY clever man, I don't think anything too drastic would have happened and i'm sure he would have covered himself in any contracts that he would have signed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Just reading the BBC story the deal is between the nimbys and the council the club has had not say, I will put money on us to fight this and appeal the councils verdict Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 There is no pretence - he got planning permission. The TVG issue is down to SLs people overlooking it or not seeing it coming. again look at brighton they have been through it all we are going through the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipdawg Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Reading the related article on the BBC Bristol news website, the implication is that some kind of 'deal' has been done. What that deal is would be anyone's guess, but I wonder if it's simply an agreement that the judge at the JR was obviously going to send it back to the PROW committee and so why doesn't everyone save some legal fees and not bother arguing about it in court. I can't think that SL or the Council would have given up part of the site without some kind of pay off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Reading the related article on the BBC Bristol news website, the implication is that some kind of 'deal' has been done. What that deal is would be anyone's guess, but I wonder if it's simply an agreement that the judge at the JR was obviously going to send it back to the PROW committee and so why doesn't everyone save some legal fees and not bother arguing about it in court. I can't think that SL or the Council would have given up part of the site without some kind of pay off Try telling that to loudmouth crispin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manon Posted June 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Well the headline sounds much more promising than the actual story. Slightly if not wholly misleading. I do wonder though, there seems to be a lot of emphasis on the word 'deal', and since on the face of it there seems to be nothing in it for the club other than to perhaps save some time, or council save some legal costs, I believe there might yet be something surprising in the detail. I wonder if there might be agreement in place that the nimbys won't appeal, should the new inspector deny them town green status for the former tip. Why would they do that? Well, maybe there has been pressure exerted on them with sl saying before tomorrow's jr is the absolute deadline for agreement or he will push for the whole lot of land. With the new town village green laws used as leverage. Maybe his part of the bargain is that he won't try to wrestle the southern part back from them in the future. I don't know,.maybe just wishful thinking.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheese Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 I thought the Merchant Venturers had come up with a deal for us to ground share at UWE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverface Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 What I don't understand is, the NIMBYS wanted the whole 42 acres as a village green, but the Council decided to only offer half of it, to which the NIMBSY then appealed. Surely if they're appealing the outcome, then they're appealing the 50% they've already been granted - after all, they didn't appeal two pieces of land just one big piece? So potentially the whole lot could go back to SL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 I supose we could always flatten Ashton Gate and rebuild it, ground share with the scum for a year in their new ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhyde Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Right so the southern half is now a town green, and we're back to square one on the north bit. Albeit with the minded to approve change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arpaul Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Well the headline sounds much more promising than the actual story. Slightly if not wholly misleading. I do wonder though, there seems to be a lot of emphasis on the word 'deal', and since on the face of it there seems to be nothing in it for the club other than to perhaps save some time, or council save some legal costs, I believe there might yet be something surprising in the detail. I wonder if there might be agreement in place that the nimbys won't appeal, should the new inspector deny them town green status for the former tip. Why would they do that? Well, maybe there has been pressure exerted on them with sl saying before tomorrow's jr is the absolute deadline for agreement or he will push for the whole lot of land. With the new town village green laws used as leverage. Maybe his part of the bargain is that he won't try to wrestle the southern part back from them in the future. I don't know,.maybe just wishful thinking.. The deal has nothing to do with Bristol City. Nor does/did the Judicial Reveiw. Hopefully it just means the Council and SAVE can restart this whole saga without even more unnecessary expenditure to the tax payer. What I do find interesting, is that Bristol City Council offered SAVE Ross Crail as the Inspector for the new Inquiry, which I think I read was declined. By offering the services of Ross Crail, the Council must have some pretty good evidence which must've surfaced after the first Inquiry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 The deal has nothing to do with Bristol City. Nor does/did the Judicial Reveiw. Hopefully it just means the Council and SAVE can restart this whole saga without even more unnecessary expenditure to the tax payer. What I do find interesting, is that Bristol City Council offered SAVE Ross Crail as the Inspector for the new Inquiry, which I think I read was declined. By offering the services of Ross Crail, the Council must have some pretty good evidence which must've surfaced after the first Inquiry? This is the Council we are talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipdawg Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 What I don't understand is, the NIMBYS wanted the whole 42 acres as a village green, but the Council decided to only offer half of it, to which the NIMBSY then appealed. Surely if they're appealing the outcome, then they're appealing the 50% they've already been granted - after all, they didn't appeal two pieces of land just one big piece? So potentially the whole lot could go back to SL? I've said this previously; the perversity of the whole situation is that the people who applied for the TVG then appealed against it being awarded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRidingHood Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 I'm so confused over this issue I can't understand anything and won't believe anyone until there is an actual stadium and I am at the turnstile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Orns Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 I'm so confused over this issue I can't understand anything and won't believe anyone until there is an actual stadium and I am at the turnstile Glad I'm not the only one! I'm really well and truly confused by this and admire the way other posters (seem to) know all about it and offer solutions / arguements Someone wake me when it's built, yeah? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slartibartfast Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Glad I'm not the only one! I'm really well and truly confused by this and admire the way other posters (seem to) know all about it and offer solutions / arguements Someone wake me when it's built, yeah? Who are ya, Rip Van Winkle ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manon Posted June 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 The deal has nothing to do with Bristol City. Nor does/did the Judicial Reveiw. Of course - well not directly anyway. But let's not beat around the bush, the council are acting on behalf of the landowners, who themselves are hand in hand with the club. The council want what the club want. Which is why any bargaining should reflect this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanhamreds Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 I cannot see how this is good news for us, the nimbys now have half the site as a TVG, at best we get the other half, but IMO its more likely now we will end up with nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 I cannot see how this is good news for us, the nimbys now have half the site as a TVG, at best we get the other half, but IMO its more likely now we will end up with nothing. Thanks for that bright outlook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bs3 Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 This is not good news , the council have back tracked and shafted us and SL . They was not going to contest the the JR so why do a deal. We have been coned by the LibDems . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanhamreds Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Thanks for that bright outlook. Sorry but that's how I see it, we've gone backwards and SL has effectively lost half his land - hard to put a positive spin on things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Orns Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Who are ya, Rip Van Winkle ? Many a true word spoken in jest! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Sorry but that's how I see it, we've gone backwards and SL has effectively lost half his land - hard to put a positive spin on things. The point is there was never going to be any development on this bit, it was just going to be a landscaped floodplain. In fact work stil has to be carried out on the land for drainage issues. We just have to present the evidence well this second time around, it's pretty clear the council will go with the same decision as the inspector this time round. If the NIMBYs then try to appeal they are massive hypocrites after what's happened today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taunton_City Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Let's just face facts this stadium will NOT happen!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanhamreds Posted June 13, 2012 Report Share Posted June 13, 2012 Let's just face facts this stadium will NOT happen!! Looking that way ......... IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.