'deal Struck' Over Ashton Vale

[eric04]

The club must be kicking themselves for underestimating the town greeners in the first place. If we'd just got the evidence together first time around we'd be playing at AV by now.

[BrizzleRed]

If and I repeat, if this is true, then this is a very sad decision for the future of BCFC. Make no mistake, if this happens, it will be Bristol City settling for a poor second best!

I'm clinging on to the hope that this is just the usual crap evil post non-story, because if not, we are witnessing the club admitting they don't believe there's any point in thinking big.

Please don't let this be true

[ciderup]

there hasn't been an official statement from the club yet…

This is the thing which I am holding on to. Once the club admit defeat and therefore that all their statements were lies then I can vent my spleen. Until then, I will stick with a feeling of extreme dsappointment.

[Guest]

This is the thing which I am holding on to. Once the club admit defeat and therefore that all their statements were lies then I can vent my spleen. Until then, I will stick with a feeling of extreme dsappointment.

Being left in the dark is bitterly disappointing. Even a snippet 'the club are aware of reports and are preparing a statement' is the absolute least they should have done.

[Kingswood Robin]

Being left in the dark is bitterly disappointing. Even a snippet 'the club are aware of reports and are preparing a statement' is the absolute least they should have done.

I suspect this was well timed. Bury bad news after just beating Rovers.

[TRL]

So SL in not following through with a promise shocker!

Ah well keo dropping down well speed boat being hired tomorrow. Life is good. Can't be arsed moaning anymore in SL let downs or lies.

[RedRock]

Here's the extract from the BBC website

But the redevelopment depends on two other planning issues being agreed.

If a planning inquiry into the town green proposal - due in October - is delayed and planning permission to redevelop Ashton Gate is granted in November, then the club will abandon its Ashton Vale stadium development, the BBC understands.

Basically that seems a load of boll*ks.

The Town Green issue is not a 'planning issue' - it relates to other legislation. Can't see that the Town Green is of any real relevance to the AG scenario (except if/when it's granted AV falls). The Council can't say if the TG Inquiry isn't held we'll save a fortune on our costs so we'll give you pp instead. I suppose if all parties agree to a delay pending the outcome of planning apps for AG and housing at AV that could be logical on the basis of a cost saving opportunity on the Inquiry if favourable planning decisions were made. Also I suppose the TG objectors could agree to withdraw their TG objections on the basis that it was housing rather than a stadium.

On planning matters the idea was cross-subsidy - that Sainsbury's buying AG would (help) fund AV - hence Sainsbury's pp being so crucial. The key issues here are now high value housing at AV generating the income to fund AG redevelopment and AG getting pp. That's the critical planning issues and if now the Council are saying the need for housing is overidding greenbelt protection and are happy with AG then there may be a clear run. They might give some weight to the fact that AV stadium has permission in breaching greenbelt policy for housing.

There was/is something called a certificate of alternative use that may (a few years since I dealt with that side of planning) have a relationship to the TG situation... dependent on wording of the TG legislation. This could have significant financial implications for the Council .. but, again, the Council can't do 'deals' on those sort of issues viz granting of pp.

The thing I can't understand is that it would take ages to determine a housing application of the scale/complexity of AV with no guaranteed outcome .. so I would have thought that AG redevelopment would be delayed by at least another year.

[MrBibs]

I had my suspicions it was gonna be the redevelopment option when they started removing the seats on Wednesday night

[Rich]

Let's examine the situation which seems very grey.

1. The original Ashton Vale stadium application included housing, this was turned down flatly by the council as it was greenbelt land and didn't offer enough financial benefit to allow the stadium to be built. Exceptional circumstances need to be proven to build on greenbelt land. This was proven for the stadium but not for housing, therefore, unless it meets that criteria, housing will not be allowed. As BCC have identified areas for thousands of houses such as Hengrove park or unless the greenbelt at AV is rescinded then it won't be built on for housing.

2. If those objectors/TVG applicants agree that housing could be built there instead of a stadium, it would prove categorically that the TVG application has been used ilegally. Not sure if this is a fact but I believe that a TVG decision was overturned because of this scenario.

3. The planning application for the redevlopment of AG should be relatively straight forward. Previous applications have been passed allowing for an increase in capacity so this should be a question of dotting the eyes and crossing the tees.

4. What influence do those TVG applicants have over the redevlopment of AG, Sweet FA. I cannot see any benefit in striking a deal which would not have any benefit.

It would not surprise me in the least if this were a ploy by the TVG and their friends at the BBC to try and upset the apple cart. I believe I heard a story run by the BBC last week which could only have been run to highlight the upcoming TVG inquiry and keep their fires burning and supporters ready for the propoganda fight.

[ciderup]

Reading the BBC article again, there is no mention of any guarantees re housing on the Vale site. It says that half will be 'given over' for housing, that doesn't say guarantee to me but available for PP to be applied for. Once that happens, who can say it won't get thrown out?

I am hoping, and beginning to think, that this story is bullsh1t!

Statement desperately needed from the club IMHO.

[grove park city]

[Rich]

Reading the BBC article again, there is no mention of any guarantees re housing on the Vale site. It says that half will be 'given over' for housing, that doesn't say guarantee to me but available for PP to be applied for. Once that happens, who can say it won't get thrown out?

I am hoping, and beginning to think, that this story is bullsh1t!

Statement desperately needed from the club IMHO.

Exactly, the council have identified sites for thousands of dwellings to meet the criteria set by government for the next thirteen or so years, this does not include sites in existing greenbelt areas, or the removal of greenbelt areas.

Does anybody really believe that the likes of Crispin and green party activists who have been behind the opposition all along, will suddenly agree to have housing built on greenbelt land. This story seems to be utter blocks and leaked to hype up the propoganda war prior to the inquiry.

[RedRock]

Exactly, the council have identified sites for thousands of dwellings to meet the criteria set by government for the next thirteen or so years, this does not include sites in existing greenbelt areas, or the removal of greenbelt areas.

Does anybody really believe that the likes of Crispin and green party activists who have been behind the opposition all along, will suddenly agree to have housing built on greenbelt land. This story seems to be utter blocks and leaked to hype up the propoganda war prior to the inquiry.

Assume there's no 5 year housing land supply issue in Bristol or (if in) North Somerset?

[BrizzleRed]

Let's examine the situation which seems very grey.

1. The original Ashton Vale stadium application included housing, this was turned down flatly by the council as it was greenbelt land and didn't offer enough financial benefit to allow the stadium to be built. Exceptional circumstances need to be proven to build on greenbelt land. This was proven for the stadium but not for housing, therefore, unless it meets that criteria, housing will not be allowed. As BCC have identified areas for thousands of houses such as Hengrove park or unless the greenbelt at AV is rescinded then it won't be built on for housing.

2. If those objectors/TVG applicants agree that housing could be built there instead of a stadium, it would prove categorically that the TVG application has been used ilegally. Not sure if this is a fact but I believe that a TVG decision was overturned because of this scenario.

3. The planning application for the redevlopment of AG should be relatively straight forward. Previous applications have been passed allowing for an increase in capacity so this should be a question of dotting the eyes and crossing the tees.

4. What influence do those TVG applicants have over the redevlopment of AG, Sweet FA. I cannot see any benefit in striking a deal which would not have any benefit.

It would not surprise me in the least if this were a ploy by the TVG and their friends at the BBC to try and upset the apple cart. I believe I heard a story run by the BBC last week which could only have been run to highlight the upcoming TVG inquiry and keep their fires burning and supporters ready for the propoganda fight.

I've heard this is a reason why the club aren't planning to build outside the footprint of previous redevelopment planning applications, as it gives less cause for objections.

If the club really are going down the AG redevelopment route, that must surely kill AV stone dead. Wasn't one of the reasons for allowing planning permission for AV was that there was no viable alternative? If we are given planning permission for the AG redevelopment, surely that would mean the reason for allowing AV on green belt also disappears?

Gutted by today's news if true.

[Rich]

I've heard this is a reason why the club aren't planning to build outside the footprint of previous redevelopment planning applications, as it gives less cause for objections.

If the club really are going down the AG redevelopment route, that must surely kill AV stone dead. Wasn't one of the reasons for allowing planning permission for AV was that there was no viable alternative? If we are given planning permission for the AG redevelopment, surely that would mean the reason for allowing AV on green belt also disappears?

Gutted by today's news if true.

The reason for giving permission at AV was that there was no suitable site for a development of that size, or to expand further should the need arise. The current application for AG is for a significantly smaller development than that planned for AV, so that scenario still stands and as such so does the need for that site.

[BrizzleRed]

The reason for giving permission at AV was that there was no suitable site for a development of that size, or to expand further should the need arise. The current application for AG is for a significantly smaller development than that planned for AV, so that scenario still stands and as such so does the need for that site.

Cheers for clarifying that. Some relief anyway I guess, as I feared a yes for AG would definitely kill AV.

Don't you just love how Bristol somehow manages to **** up just about anything positive that can happen here

[Guest]

Don't you just love how Bristol somehow manages to **** up just about anything positive that can happen here

Bristol, lovely place but crap city which continues to fall behind and is closed for business.

[Rich]

Don't believe all you hear or read. The applicants/objectors will do anything they can to carry out a hatchet job on BCFC and it's supporters. This story is no surprise to me coming at the same time as stories of violence and pitch invasions.

Any planning application for greenbelt development has to go through the proper legal process, the council, George Fergusson and definately not Crispin or his cronies can alter planning law to suit thier stance, someone else would then object.

We must also remember that they read these pages and will gather information to use for their cause against the club and it's owners, as they have in the past when taking tongue in cheek frustrated statements of intent and claiming physical threats which helped their case when put before a judge. It's likely that they are conducting a survey of fans opinions using comments made on this site. As many supporters are despondent over the new stadium delays and seek comfort in the hope of redeveloping AG they will claim this as a lack of support for the new stadium.

[BrizzleRed]

Don't believe all you hear or read. The applicants/objectors will do anything they can to carry out a hatchet job on BCFC and it's supporters. This story is no surprise to me coming at the same time as stories of violence and pitch invasions.

Any planning application for greenbelt development has to go through the proper legal process, the council, George Fergusson and definately not Crispin or his cronies can alter planning law to suit thier stance, someone else would then object.

Very good point and does seem a hell of a coincidence, now you mention it. There's certainly been plenty of dirty tricks by them so far and the nimbys clearly have some useful connections where it counts.

Guess we'll have to wait and see what the club's response is to this.

[BrizzleRed]

Bristol, lovely place but crap city which continues to fall behind and is closed for business.

Exactly and so many missed opportunities over the years.

Maybe SL should look into starting a horse drawn tram and bike manufacturing business on the AV site, as you can bet Ferguson would make sure that one gets pushed through.

[Rich]

Very good point and does seem a hell of a coincidence, now you mention it. There's certainly been plenty of dirty tricks by them so far and the nimbys clearly have some useful connections where it counts.

Guess we'll have to wait and see what the club's response is to this.

I hasten to add that these are my opinions, they are based on what knowledge I have of the process so far.

[Bat Fastard]

A re-vamped Ashton Gate would be too small to sustain a competitive Premiership team - and without scope for further expansion would, at best, mean that we may become a yoyo club. If work does have to start at Ashton Gate as an expedient, then why not continue with the planning application for AV, which may be successful by the time the new East End is built - because we would have taken away the main weapon that the Nimbys have, i.e. the threat that we might waste time and end up with nothing. This approach could give the club breathing space and any extra costs involved would be about 10-15% of the proposed AV. These kind of cost over-runs would not be unusual on a large project.

[Manon]

All seems very odd indeed.

We can't rule out this being the nimbys utilising their contacts at the bbc, as they've no doubt done it before.

But I'm failing to see what anyone is gaining from this.

If it is a fabrication, what purpose does it serve?

If it is true, then forgetting for now all the legislation and planning implications and the fact the nimbys have no say in these matters anyway, why would they want housing there... I thought the sole purpose wa to prevent any development on the green belt, knowing it would break the seal, and be the catalyst for the whole area being opened up for development?

[CotswoldRed]

None of this makes any sense.

1. City could easily get planning permission for the AG redevelopment anyway.

2. Where's the guarantee that houses will be permitted? There simply isn't.

3. Given everything that happens at AV is subject to planning and court proceedings, how is there any deal to be done? Nobody outside of a court has the autonomy to decide it's future, isn't that the whole point here?

Are the courts doing deals now?

[CiderJar]

[Chappers]

Not unexpected, and maybe the best option given such determined opposition, and lack of will by those in power. All very well talking of PL, but we are currently 20th in the third tier, and have spent just 4 years in the last 100 in the top flight, so maybe a reality check is required. TBH, I think SL is finding out the realities of football club ownership, opposition to stadium plans, £50M spent taking us from modest third tier club to modest third tier club, and as more money comes into the game, it gets more concentrated at a few clubs, but still all wasted on player wages.

[IdliketoRogerMoore]

None of this makes any sense.

1. City could easily get planning permission for the AG redevelopment anyway.

2. Where's the guarantee that houses will be permitted? There simply isn't.

3. Given everything that happens at AV is subject to planning and court proceedings, how is there any deal to be done? Nobody outside of a court has the autonomy to decide it's future, isn't that the whole point here?

Are the courts doing deals now?

if they are can I give them a flat screen tv and a 1kg of mature cheddar do you think I get off with a suspended sentence for my assault on a mime artist! P.s it was a mime attack

[Son of Fred]

Just seen this pop up on the evil post site.

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Ashton-Vale-deal-understood-struck-future-stadium/story-19763874-detail/story.html

Sounds like we have given up doesn't it?

this isnt really news in some respects-the day detailed plans for developing the gate were announced it was the death knell for AV...was always a case then of a steady drip and letting it die a natural but lingering death that allowed the fans the time to come to terms.

[Son of Fred]

Are they saying that if the plans for the Gate are approved, we won't bother with Ashton Vale? I don't really understand what this deal is

you have it in one-an instant headache cure for the council{and steve Lansdowne!}in one fell swoop.pity about AV but there you go-staying at the spiritual home.

[Gazred]

Ive read the story and every post on this thread and i still don't get it.

Agreed a deal with campaigners? What and how would they agree a deal with them? Surely both applications are treated individually and on their own merits?

I don't see how making a deal over the TVG AV issue could or should have any bearing on the council approving the redevelopment at Ashton Gate. Its not as if the same group could pull the same stunt on any application for AG is it?

Really don't see what is to gain by turning away from AV now, so what if the review goes the NIMBY's way, most seem to think permission for AG is pretty much a cert anyway so why not wait and see. Is there some kind of cost involved to SL to await the outcome of the enquiry?

All seems very fishy to me.