Jump to content
IGNORED

AG Redevelopment latest


CyderInACan

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, elhombrecito said:

You're aware it no longer exists, right?

Ah ok. No I wasn’t. 
Thankfully I don’t ever have a need to venture down that way any more. 
But still - she was a beauty. On a par with the suspension bridge without doubt 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/10/2023 at 20:09, IAmNick said:

Reading between the lines on the statement and from various comments I've seen around, it sounds to me like there's a reasonable chance ETM are operating outside of their agreed hours or noise levels.

"Our application to Bristol City Council proceeded on this basis and made the entirely legitimate assumption that ETM would operate in accordance with its own planning permission, environmental permit and trading licences."

"Bristol City Council has already confirmed that providing ETM stays within permitted noise levels, it wouldn’t be too noisy for anyone living in the proposed new homes."

If it's been confirmed it's fine provided they stay within permitted noise levels, and obey their permits then why are they worried? Unless they aren't doing those things.

I think that's probably what they're really worried about - they're not operating in the way they should, and more houses nearby will bring too much attention to it and they'll have to change their business to some degree which with affect their bottom line.

This is complete speculation by the way, but it adds up imo.

Exactly this , always being overtaken by an ETM skip lorry at 4.30 in the morning on my way to work, not sure you’d be happy having a skip loaded/unloaded outside a property at that hour !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said:

It'll either be chucked out by the judge in a few weeks, or accepted to go to  hearing which would take months, maybe years.

Sounds likely if it doesn’t get thrown out by the judge it’ll be dropped. Unlikely SL will want to wait years. As the original plan was amended to allow for ETM’s concerns you’d think it’ll be kicked out, but who knows nothing about planning in Bristol seems driven by logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ashtongreight said:

Sounds likely if it doesn’t get thrown out by the judge it’ll be dropped. Unlikely SL will want to wait years. As the original plan was amended to allow for ETM’s concerns you’d think it’ll be kicked out, but who knows nothing about planning in Bristol seems driven by logic.

It seems ETM have gone all in with the hope that the potential added costs of delays, mean they stump up for the roof. I don't think he will. 
ETM's objections are the same ones as were turned down before, chancers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

It seems ETM have gone all in with the hope that the potential added costs of delays, mean they stump up for the roof. I don't think he will. 
ETM's objections are the same ones as were turned down before, chancers.

If it does go to JR I think AG and SL will just give up on it. ETM win. Bristol as a city will lose again, but I guess we're good at losing in this city. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Full nelson said:

If it does go to JR I think AG and SL will just give up on it. ETM win. Bristol as a city will lose again, but I guess we're good at losing in this city. 

I don't think ETM want that win. I have heard rumours they are flouting their contract agreements, exceeding noise levels and working over hours . I think they may be scrutinised a lot closer if an agreement isn't forth coming. They would like the roof paid for, they want to go 24 hours apparently and extend the contract. I don't see this as a good way of doing it. 
I really hope something happens, I'm fed up of progress being held up by spurious claims. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 1960maaan said:

I don't think ETM want that win. I have heard rumours they are flouting their contract agreements, exceeding noise levels and working over hours . I think they may be scrutinised a lot closer if an agreement isn't forth coming. They would like the roof paid for, they want to go 24 hours apparently and extend the contract. I don't see this as a good way of doing it. 
I really hope something happens, I'm fed up of progress being held up by spurious claims. 

This is Bristol. Its what happens here  unfortunately. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

It seems ETM have gone all in with the hope that the potential added costs of delays, mean they stump up for the roof. I don't think he will. 
ETM's objections are the same ones as were turned down before, chancers.

Or that it’ll go to a JR, which could take months or years and hoping Bristol Sport will pull out altogether. More houses around them would prevent them extending in the future. It would also highlight any flouting of existing agreements. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

It'll either be chucked out by the judge in a few weeks, or accepted to go to  hearing which would take months, maybe years.

Cutting to the chase how do I(we) find out when the judge will sit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Hxj said:

Unless you are 'in the know' you will need to check the following on a regular basis: Royal Courts of Justice daily cause list 16 October 2023 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

I always follow your posts and knowledge on these sorts of thing HXJ as you really know your stuff.

What's your gut feeling on all this? Is it really going to go down the pan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Sniper said:

What's your gut feeling on all this? Is it really going to go down the pan?

Thanks.

I have a degree of sympathy for ETM on this.  They are in a highly regulated industry and all of a sudden they will have hundreds of new middle class snoops neighbours all looking through the fence to try and get them closed down because of little Oliver's asthma and sleeping patterns.  Well actually it will be so they can brag about how much their house has gone up in value as it is no longer next to a waste processing plant.  However each compliant takes time, effort and expense to deal with.

As to the actual case then the test for Judicial Review is pretty high, plus you have to demonstrate, even if you win, that the likelihood is that the same decision wouldn't be made again.

Unless there is a 'smoking gun' in the planning decisions I doubt that ETM will get permission from the Court to bring the case.  That said it all takes time, probably a year, and lots of money to deal with.

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Hxj said:

Thanks.

I have a degree of sympathy for ETM on this.  They are in a highly regulated industry and all of a sudden they will have hundreds of new middle class snoops neighbours all looking through the fence to try and get them closed down because of little Oliver's asthma and sleeping patterns.  Well actually it will be so they can brag about how much their house has gone up in value as it is no longer next to a waste processing plant.  However each compliant takes time, effort and expense to deal with.

As to the actual case then the test for Judicial Review is pretty high, plus you have to demonstrate, even if you win, that the likelihood is that the same decision wouldn't be made again.

Unless there is a 'smoking gun' in the planning decisions I doubt that ETM will get permission from the Court to bring the case.  That said it all takes time, probably a year, and lots of money to deal with.

I appreciate the factual part of your post, but I don't like the tone of the highlighted part. 

It's not fair to suggest that the only buyers in the development will be "middle-class snoops", especially as there will be affordable housing as part of the development. 

People from all walks of life will be looking to get a house there, including a few on this forum no doubt. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Hxj said:

Thanks.

I have a degree of sympathy for ETM on this.  They are in a highly regulated industry and all of a sudden they will have hundreds of new middle class snoops neighbours all looking through the fence to try and get them closed down because of little Oliver's asthma and sleeping patterns.  Well actually it will be so they can brag about how much their house has gone up in value as it is no longer next to a waste processing plant.  However each compliant takes time, effort and expense to deal with.

As to the actual case then the test for Judicial Review is pretty high, plus you have to demonstrate, even if you win, that the likelihood is that the same decision wouldn't be made again.

Unless there is a 'smoking gun' in the planning decisions I doubt that ETM will get permission from the Court to bring the case.  That said it all takes time, probably a year, and lots of money to deal with.

 

Good.

They should operate within their licence and planning conditions, there will be no issues if they do that.

  • Like 6
  • Flames 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Hxj said:

Thanks.

I have a degree of sympathy for ETM on this.  They are in a highly regulated industry and all of a sudden they will have hundreds of new middle class snoops neighbours all looking through the fence to try and get them closed down because of little Oliver's asthma and sleeping patterns.  Well actually it will be so they can brag about how much their house has gone up in value as it is no longer next to a waste processing plant.  However each compliant takes time, effort and expense to deal with.

As to the actual case then the test for Judicial Review is pretty high, plus you have to demonstrate, even if you win, that the likelihood is that the same decision wouldn't be made again.

Unless there is a 'smoking gun' in the planning decisions I doubt that ETM will get permission from the Court to bring the case.  That said it all takes time, probably a year, and lots of money to deal with.

 

If ETM operate within their planning permission and licences etc, then little Olivers sleep patterns won't be impacted!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

I appreciate the factual part of your post, but I don't like the tone of the highlighted part. 

It's not fair to suggest that the only buyers in the development will be "middle-class snoops", especially as there will be affordable housing as part of the development. 

People from all walks of life will be looking to get a house there, including a few on this forum no doubt. 

I'm looking to buy one! I was raised in Sneyd Park if that helps 😏

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...