Barrs Court Red Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 I don't how many times it has to be said: the piece of lands not big enough. Talking of size, I noticed on one of the rovers stadium design statements that the building will measure 202m by 166m, which is very big indeed. Certainly much larger than most stadium footprints, especially bland bowl type arenas with comparable capacities . I realise these dimensions include the gym/corporate/conference facilities which extend from two of the for stands, but still it seems disproportionately large. The council didn't seem to think so when they offered the land. Although comparing it to Ashton Gate it does seem a litle on the small side, unless part of the waterway could be built over. All conjecture anyway as it's a non starter. Interestingly the Alderman Moore site seems big enough............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 The council didn't seem to think so when they offered the land. Although comparing it to Ashton Gate it does seem a litle on the small side, unless part of the waterway could be built over. All conjecture anyway as it's a non starter. Interestingly the Alderman Moore site seems big enough............ slightly confused by that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 haha sorry folks, dont have access to much else but paint and not alot of time, Top left is Ashton Vale obviously. We already know the southern half is off the table for development, but that was always the plan. Unfortunatly joined to it is the "Enterprise zone" at Temples Meads. North of the river is the old sorting office site. (the utter eyesore you see if you come to Bristol from London). It was offered years ago, then was due to be T4's studio, and now seems to be gathering likes of "urban art" South of the river is the site of the doomed arena, where the council gave the land away, spent bundles of cash clearing it, and then pulled out. Ashton Gate bottom left, with the allotments next to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DancinDannyD Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 I don't how many times it has to be said: the piece of lands not big enough. Talking of size, I noticed on one of the rovers stadium design statements that the building will measure 202m by 166m, which is very big indeed. Certainly much larger than most stadium footprints, especially bland bowl type arenas with comparable capacities . I realise these dimensions include the gym/corporate/conference facilities which extend from two of the for stands, but still it seems disproportionately large. The rake of the stands seems quite shallow, compared say to Readings MadStad. Steeper stands need a smaller footprint obviously. Also, the concourse and concessions etc are at the top of the stands and open to the pitch (at ground level, the seats are 'below ground level') rather than under the stand as with most other stadia, again, this will add extra width / length to the footprint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCAGFC Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Just goes to prove that the TM & the AG (+Brady/Hireite land etc, etc) sites are nowhere near big enough for a new stadium. BCAGFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manon Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 The rake of the stands seems quite shallow, compared say to Readings MadStad. Steeper stands need a smaller footprint obviously. Also, the concourse and concessions etc are at the top of the stands and open to the pitch (at ground level, the seats are 'below ground level') rather than under the stand as with most other stadia, again, this will add extra width / length to the footprint. Does seem shallow, but was thinking it more likely to do with the extra large warm up track between pitch and stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manon Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Just goes to prove that the TM & the AG (+Brady/Hireite land etc, etc) sites are nowhere near big enough for a new stadium. BCAGFC TM no, but with braby/hire rite it can be done, as my previously posted video proved (will hav to try and dig it out). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbred Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Very rough quick picture edit, grey "lines" showing the different sites. The arena would never be big enough. The allotment might be, but i cant see anyone getting permission on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xerox6060 Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 The biggest stumbling block here isn't the memorial gates that other people have suggested but that they are proposing another large supermarket in close proximity to two other large supermarkets i.e. tesco at eastville and golden hill. That combined with the the inevitable local protests mean i think it might be a struggle to get the approval needed. Personally i feel Bristol needs these two stadiums to be built to drag its sporting facilities into the 21st century whether they are within the city limits or not is immaterial, like bristol needs a tram to be build instead of this ridiculous guided busway but thats a different argument Agree don't believe this will happen as Sainsbury won't get permission or it will be a long drawn out affair at the very least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtyeoRed Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 To Friendlygas, Get a life mate, if you took my post seriously, then I feel sorry for you. most people would realise that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiz Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 friendly gas you missed my point. The ground was given to all players of Rugby in Bristol in memory of fallen soldiers. The ground is sacred in my eyes as someone who played for the united and also and as important the combination. It wasn't just the gates. Please don't get me wrong this by no means me trying to get in the way of new stadium, but feel this is being just brushed over. For me the legacy was a memorial for Rugby in Bristol and for every Bristolian rugby player playing at the Mem was sacred. The ground was given for all players of Rugby in Bristol, and the home for Bristol Rugby Club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3 GAS Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 friendly gas you missed my point. The ground was given to all players of Rugby in Bristol in memory of fallen soldiers. The ground is sacred in my eyes as someone who played for the united and also and as important the combination. It wasn't just the gates. Please don't get me wrong this by no means me trying to get in the way of new stadium, but feel this is being just brushed over. For me the legacy was a memorial for Rugby in Bristol and for every Bristolian rugby player playing at the Mem was sacred. The ground was given for all players of Rugby in Bristol, and the home for Bristol Rugby Club Whilst i understand your views and see where your coming from, do honestly believe that that site can be left as a green sports field forever? Would be nice if the world worked that way but it doesnt. Sadly all the People who have a problem now with these plans didnt mention a word when The Ground was sold to Rovers or indeed when the Training Pitch area and car park was sold by former Bristol RFC directors for housing to be built just before the sale of the MEM to Rovers, (the Training ground was part of the ground so therefore was surely part of the Memorial Fields for the Rugby players of Bristol? and this weakens there stance a little IMO. As i say , I totally understand the sentiments towards the Memorial Ground and what it stands for , but development will happen be it by Rovers Sainsburys or anyone else sadly. Hopefully by 2020 both Rovers & City will be in new stadia (us first for a few years please so we can play catch up quicker and easier!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Whilst i understand your views and see where your coming from, do honestly believe that that site can be left as a green sports field forever? Would be nice if the world worked that way but it doesnt. Sadly all the People who have a problem now with these plans didnt mention a word when The Ground was sold to Rovers or indeed when the Training Pitch area and car park was sold by former Bristol RFC directors for housing to be built just before the sale of the MEM to Rovers, (the Training ground was part of the ground so therefore was surely part of the Memorial Fields for the Rugby players of Bristol? and this weakens there stance a little IMO. As i say , I totally understand the sentiments towards the Memorial Ground and what it stands for , but development will happen be it by Rovers Sainsburys or anyone else sadly. Hopefully by 2020 both Rovers & City will be in new stadia (us first for a few years please so we can play catch up quicker and easier!) I see Higgs has come out with the Championship football in 5 years comment. This bloke seriously hasn't a clue on football matters. God knows what manager you would of ended up with if McGhee wouldn't of approached you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semblar Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Thought for the day. Add "Rovers new Stadium" to "Rovers the Barcelona of League 2" and "Gypsy/Pikey" - should the name for their proposed stadium be the "New Campsite"? Coat grabbing would normally commence at this point but it's a bit too warm.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DancinDannyD Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 friendly gas you missed my point. The ground was given to all players of Rugby in Bristol in memory of fallen soldiers. The ground is sacred in my eyes as someone who played for the united and also and as important the combination. It wasn't just the gates. Please don't get me wrong this by no means me trying to get in the way of new stadium, but feel this is being just brushed over. For me the legacy was a memorial for Rugby in Bristol and for every Bristolian rugby player playing at the Mem was sacred. The ground was given for all players of Rugby in Bristol, and the home for Bristol Rugby Club Ron Trott representing the Former Bristol Rugby Players Society has now formally lodged a letter of support for the Sainsburys plans at the Mem on the BCC Planning website, commenting that the proposal will enable the Society and all other stakeholders to retain the annual service of remembrance on the site, and that the Society has been involved in numerous meetings with Sainsburys during the development of the proposals. So, if the application is to fail, the chances of it failing due to the Memorial aspect of the site would appear to have been significantly diminished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3 GAS Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 I see Higgs has come out with the Championship football in 5 years comment. This bloke seriously hasn't a clue on football matters. God knows what manager you would of ended up with if McGhee wouldn't of approached you. Its standard affair from ffotball chairman... remember the stuff that Bros Keyboard bloke came out with for you guys... European football was menntioned by him ! they all say it with good intentions but the real fan knows the capabilites... Rovers would have a chance of Championship football in 5 years ... Brighton were in Div 4 less than 5 years ago , it doesnt take long with momentum however its easy to get stuck in div 3 and div 4 as we both know. Rovers have as much chance as any league 2 club and prob a few league 1 clubs ... its all Ifs and Buts ... thats the nature of football, we could go up next seaspon and u lot go down and its a level playing field... equally you will have fans telling me rovers will go down and city reach the prem.. theres a chance of anything happening .. My opinion is we will finish nearer to you than last year and that could continue over the next few years especailly as Lansdowns days of spalshing huge money seems to have stopped for now at least... as i say ... All Ifs and Buts though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Sadly all the People who have a problem now with these plans didnt mention a word when The Ground was sold to Rovers or indeed when the Training Pitch area and car park was sold by former Bristol RFC directors for housing to be built just before the sale of the MEM to Rovers, (the Training ground was part of the ground so therefore was surely part of the Memorial Fields for the Rugby players of Bristol? and this weakens there stance a little IMO. No, it doesn't weaken anyone's stance. You appear to be accusing people of double standards, which I think is unfair. When the ground was sold to Rovers the purpose of the venue remained the same....sport. Even by selling off some of the training pitches the purpose of the venue remained the same. Do BRFC plan to honour the old Mem and the reasons for its exsistance in the new stadium? If the answer is yes then I cannot see a problem as you would simply be moving the sporting memorial aspect of the Mem to your new stadium. As I've already said, it's not an anti Gas thing, it's an anti selling a war memorial thing. However, in my opinion, your club can easily resolve the issue by officially dedicating your new ground as a new memorial. Maybe they plan to do this... If so, great...if not, why not? It wouldn't be difficult. I think that's a reasonable viewpoint considering the sensitive nature of what you plan to sell. I also think Gasheads need to look at some of their fellow fans who suddenly become avid dog walkers and newt fanciers when City announce plans to build a new stadium on what a couple of NIMBY's claim is a village green. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne allisons tongues Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Am I right in thinking there was a covenant for the ground, but no one can find it. Which makes the covenant invalid so Ground can be sold off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3 GAS Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 No, it doesn't weaken anyone's stance. You appear to be accusing people of double standards, which I think is unfair. When the ground was sold to Rovers the purpose of the venue remained the same....sport. Even by selling off some of the training pitches the purpose of the venue remained the same. Do BRFC plan to honour the old Mem and the reasons for its exsistance in the new stadium? If the answer is yes then I cannot see a problem as you would simply be moving the sporting memorial aspect of the Mem to your new stadium. As I've already said, it's not an anti Gas thing, it's an anti selling a war memorial thing. However, in my opinion, your club can easily resolve the issue by officially dedicating your new ground as a new memorial. Maybe they plan to do this... If so, great...if not, why not? It wouldn't be difficult. I think that's a reasonable viewpoint considering the sensitive nature of what you plan to sell. I also think Gasheads need to look at some of their fellow fans who suddenly become avid dog walkers and newt fanciers when City announce plans to build a new stadium on what a couple of NIMBY's claim is a village green. not really double standards .. im just saying it was left as a memorial to Rugby players who fell in the war,,, the ground should never have been for sale to anyone at all ... as soon as Bristol RFC directors tried to cash in (the sale of training pitch and car park) and selling half to rovers it was a step towards commercial land deals... BRISTOL RFC put a price on the land and it should have been stopped then, and the land placed into some type of memorial trust but it was sold for someones gain and that opened up a set of circumstances that led us to now. Rovers Directors could argue ... it was ok for Bris to take cash for the sale of a memorial why cant they... not saying its right or wrong im just pointing out the RFC didnt worry what was happening when they tried to sell it to anyone as they headed towards bankruptcy... infact if rovers didnt buy half a company called Amtrak were going to buy it under the same terms and who knows what they would have done with it by now! Im hopeful Rovers will inc a memorial at the UWE if its built.. they take the memorial gates very seriously and all players and staff take part in a service at the gates every year so i believe its now a firm part of our clubs history Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeble Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 not really double standards .. im just saying it was left as a memorial to Rugby players who fell in the war,,, the ground should never have been for sale to anyone at all ... as soon as Bristol RFC directors tried to cash in (the sale of training pitch and car park) and selling half to rovers it was a step towards commercial land deals... BRISTOL RFC put a price on the land and it should have been stopped then, and the land placed into some type of memorial trust but it was sold for someones gain and that opened up a set of circumstances that led us to now. Rovers Directors could argue ... it was ok for Bris to take cash for the sale of a memorial why cant they... not saying its right or wrong im just pointing out the RFC didnt worry what was happening when they tried to sell it to anyone as they headed towards bankruptcy... infact if rovers didnt buy half a company called Amtrak were going to buy it under the same terms and who knows what they would have done with it by now! Im hopeful Rovers will inc a memorial at the UWE if its built.. they take the memorial gates very seriously and all players and staff take part in a service at the gates every year so i believe its now a firm part of our clubs history Actually Amtrack were going to buy 100 per cent of the Memorial Ground, so there might not have been a ground to play on when the rugby club went bust, had they not accepted Rovers' offer to buy half the Mem. And it was making sure that the ground did not get sold off leaving one club with no home, that led to the buy out clause if either team failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DancinDannyD Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 Actually Amtrack were going to buy 100 per cent of the Memorial Ground, so there might not have been a ground to play on when the rugby club went bust, had they not accepted Rovers' offer to buy half the Mem. And it was makiUng sure that the ground did not get sold off leaving one club with no home, that led to the buy out clause if either team failed. ^ ^ don't let the truth get in the way of a good witch hunt! Amtrak were going to turn the Mem site into a Regional Distribution Centre. Rovers 'stealing' the Mem (the £2.5m for HALF ownership of the ground was as much as Amtrak was going to pay for the WHOLE site) protected the War Memorial and the Sainsburys plans are very sensitive to the Memorial aspect of the site. As stated elsewhere, the £10k buyout clause for EITHER club (Gas or the rugby) was to ensure that ownership was retained if either club went bust. It was the rugbys clubs financial mismanagement that lost them their half, not the Gas 'stealing' it for £10k. But that doesn't fit the anti-Gas agenda so let's wash over it ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 But that doesn't fit the anti-Gas agenda so let's wash over it ... Who are you referring to as having an anti Gas agenda Danny? Weebles post was quoting a response to a post made by me and I clearly stated how I think Rovers can easily resolve the situation to keep everyone happy. As for the Amtrak issue, surely a Regional Distribution Centre would have been subject to the same planning procedures as Sainsburys are now so, believe it or not, you would of heard the same views from people re. the memorial? Or is that not the case? Just because that situation never occurred doesn't mean that everyone expressing concerns now are on some kind of witch hunt. Some people do give a sh*t about things like war memorials, obviously that doesnt fit the "poor Rovers, they are all probably just jealous, why can't they just do what they want?" agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 Rovers Directors could argue ... it was ok for Bris to take cash for the sale of a memorial why cant they... not saying its right or wrong im just pointing out the RFC didnt worry what was happening when they tried to sell it to anyone as they headed towards bankruptcy... infact if rovers didnt buy half a company called Amtrak were going to buy it under the same terms and who knows what they would have done with it by now! Im hopeful Rovers will inc a memorial at the UWE if its built.. they take the memorial gates very seriously and all players and staff take part in a service at the gates every year so i believe its now a firm part of our clubs history There appears to be no legally binding documents prohibiting either Rovers or the Rugby club from selling the Mem, so as businessmen, the directors of Bristol Rovers aren't doing anything wrong...I understand that. I also think, as custodians of a War Memorial they have an excellent opportunity to do the right thing by including a Memorial at the new site and dedicating the new stadium to the same people the current Mem is dedicated to. As I said, I don't know if they already plan to do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DancinDannyD Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 There appears to be no legally binding documents prohibiting either Rovers or the Rugby club from selling the Mem, so as businessmen, the directors of Bristol Rovers aren't doing anything wrong...I understand that. I also think, as custodians of a War Memorial they have an excellent opportunity to do the right thing by including a Memorial at the new site and dedicating the new stadium to the same people the current Mem is dedicated to. As I said, I don't know if they already plan to do this. Will SL dedicate the Vale to the fallen Bristol Rugby players once he moves the team to join us (it's the generally perceived view that the rugby club will follow us the Vale now SL owns them) ? That would be an excellent way to achieve (yet more) one upmanship on the Gas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DancinDannyD Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 There appears to be no legally binding documents prohibiting either Rovers or the Rugby club from selling the Mem, so as businessmen, the directors of Bristol Rovers aren't doing anything wrong...I understand that. I also think, as custodians of a War Memorial they have an excellent opportunity to do the right thing by including a Memorial at the new site and dedicating the new stadium to the same people the current Mem is dedicated to. As I said, I don't know if they already plan to do this. As far as I'm aware, there are no plans to dedicate the new Gas Stadium as a Memorial to the fallen rugby players. That is what the Memorial Square at the Sainsbury's is for, where the annual Service of Remembrance will continue to be held and which has the formal endorsement of the Former Bristol Rugby Players Society Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 Will SL dedicate the Vale to the fallen Bristol Rugby players once he moves the team to join us (it's the generally perceived view that the rugby club will follow us the Vale now SL owns them) ? That would be an excellent way to achieve (yet more) one upmanship on the Gas Let's put it this way, IF Ashton Gate had originally been granted to Bristol City Football Club (or any other Bristol sports club who had previously occupied and owned the site) as a lasting memorial for sport to be played in memory of soldiers who died in any conflict, then I would like it if BCFC recognised this and dedicated their new ground to the same people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.