Bristol R*vers dustbin thread

[Numero Uno]

6 minutes ago, phantom said:

It's not illegal to do so 

It's not but it will be expensive for them if Planning Permission is rejected............

[alexukhc]

7 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

It's not but it will be expensive for them if Planning Permission is rejected............

Fingers, toes, eyes and knob crossed

[Mayes86]

They have to be the only team in the country that has a South-West stand and I find it absolutely hilarious. 

[StGeorge]

11 minutes ago, alexukhc said:

and knob crossed

That's some achievement, well played, hope A&E are understanding 

[alexukhc]

15 minutes ago, StGeorge said:

That's some achievement, well played, hope A&E are understanding 

Just don’t make me laugh I can’t piss myself or disaster 

[BS3City]

22 minutes ago, StGeorge said:

That's some achievement, well played, hope A&E are understanding 

Agreed, I was impressed by that!

How does one cross one's knob?

[italian dave]

14 minutes ago, BS3City said:

Agreed, I was impressed by that!

How does one cross one's knob?

Haven't you seen McVities easter special, the hot cross hob knob?

[Bristol Rob]

16 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Haven't you seen McVities easter special, the hot cross hob knob?

At risk of derailing this important thread, am I alone if having a preference for the non-seasonal toasted Tea Cake as a far more enjoyable alternative to the bun that is hot or crossed?

[milo1111]

1 hour ago, phantom said:

It's not illegal to do so 

It’s not but it’s stupid and a big gamble. 

[StGeorge]

Just now, milo1111 said:

It’s not but it’s stupid and a big gamble

Crossing your knob? 

[alexukhc]

39 minutes ago, BS3City said:

Agreed, I was impressed by that!

How does one cross one's knob?

I’d let you into a secret but it’s too long and you’ll never get it anyway 

[Rudolf Hucker]

44 minutes ago, BS3City said:

Agreed, I was impressed by that!

How does one cross one's knob?

Is folding it in half ok? Asking for a friend. 

[GrahamC]

2 hours ago, milo1111 said:

Is that right that they actually started building this thing before they have planning permission???

Yep & I’ll bet very good money they have been tipped off by BCC that permission will sail through.

Bristol Labour group are very noticeably & vocally behind them (remarkably mute though during the Ashton Vale saga, weren’t they?) & have effectively portrayed the Greens as anti development to the point where they are being forced to come out & say they are in favour too but want the correct process followed.

Must be amazing to live outside of South Bristol & have local politicians who give a **** about where you live, eh?

[slartibartfast]

2 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Yep & I’ll bet very good money they have been tipped off by BCC that permission will sail through.

Bristol Labour group are very noticeably & vocally behind them (remarkably mute though during the Ashton Vale saga, weren’t they?) & have effectively portrayed the Greens as anti development to the point where they are being forced to come out & say they are in favour too but want the correct process followed.

Must be amazing to live outside of South Bristol & have local politicians who give a **** about where you live, eh?

They're playing a dodgy game as regards votes in the future. Why would they pander to a small enclave of fewers (clues in the name, comrades ) ?

[slartibartfast]

3 hours ago, milo1111 said:

Is that right that they actually started building this thing before they have planning permission???

Thing, being correct term for it, jeez what an abortion ! Don't see what the fuss is about, looks more like a Dinky Toy garage . 

[BS13 Robin]

I built better with my Meccano set back in the 70s ffs

[Red Homer]

7 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Yep & I’ll bet very good money they have been tipped off by BCC that permission will sail through.

Bristol Labour group are very noticeably & vocally behind them (remarkably mute though during the Ashton Vale saga, weren’t they?) & have effectively portrayed the Greens as anti development to the point where they are being forced to come out & say they are in favour too but want the correct process followed.

Must be amazing to live outside of South Bristol & have local politicians who give a **** about where you live, eh?

You'd be surprised Graham at the number of cases that come across my desk where the LPA have indicated that permission is likely be granted in their pre-application advice, only for the proposal to be turned down by either the planning department of the committee.

Edited August 24, 2023 by Red Homer

[Monkeh]

They won't get a safety cert unless it meets and is granted planning permission and building regs,

The reason they are carrying is because they are tinpot and any delay will lead to increased costs

[Miah Dennehy]

8 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Yep & I’ll bet very good money they have been tipped off by BCC that permission will sail through.

Bristol Labour group are very noticeably & vocally behind them (remarkably mute though during the Ashton Vale saga, weren’t they?) & have effectively portrayed the Greens as anti development to the point where they are being forced to come out & say they are in favour too but want the correct process followed.

Must be amazing to live outside of South Bristol & have local politicians who give a **** about where you live, eh?

I remember the BCC councillor who turned up to a meeting in a City shirt during a discussion on planning proposals for Rovers new stadium- don't ask me which one, I've lost count on that one- incredibly unprofessional but it had no bearing on the outcome whatsoever. I would imagine plenty of councillors support one or the other (glad that they do) , but the perception by some City fans that BCC is pro Rovers and by some Rovers fans that is pro City really simply isn't true. The same goes for the imagined bias of the Evening Post and Radio Bristol. I  spend a bit of time in Glasgow where fans of Celtic and Rangers accuse organisations of bias toward one team or the other and fans of Partick and Queens Park accuse them of bias towrds the old firm. I suspect the same accusations get made in Sheffield, Liverpool, Stoke, Birmingham etc etc.

Mind you, just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you

[GrahamC]

1 minute ago, Miah Dennehy said:

I remember the BCC councillor who turned up to a meeting in a City shirt during a discussion on planning proposals for Rovers new stadium- don't ask me which one, I've lost count on that one- incredibly unprofessional but it had no bearing on the outcome whatsoever. I would imagine plenty of councillors support one or the other (glad that they do) , but the perception by some City fans that BCC is pro Rovers and by some Rovers fans that is pro City really simply isn't true. The same goes for the imagined bias of the Evening Post and Radio Bristol. I  spend a bit of time in Glasgow where fans of Celtic and Rangers accuse organisations of bias toward one team or the other and fans of Partick and Queens Park accuse them of bias towrds the old firm. I suspect the same accusations get made in Sheffield, Liverpool, Stoke, Birmingham etc etc.

Mind you, just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you

You believe what you like.

I have no recollection of the City shirt incident at all but do recall a Councillor (now ex) who was a City season ticket holder for us excluding himself from the Ashton Vale debate.

I also know of a Rovers supporter Councillor who didn’t do so when the decision was made to sponsor a stand at your place by Bristol Energy, a loss making organisation which truly defied belief.

You think what you like, I know what I hear & I see.

South Bristol is being incredibly poorly served by an administration whose focus is blatantly clearly elsewhere in the city.

[italian dave]

2 hours ago, Monkeh said:

They won't get a safety cert unless it meets and is granted planning permission and building regs,

The reason they are carrying is because they are tinpot and any delay will lead to increased costs

Not half as much as the increased costs of a consent that’s subject to amendments to the design of something that’s already built. 

[italian dave]

3 hours ago, Red Homer said:

You'd be surprised Graham at the number of cases that come across my desk where the LPA have indicated that permission is likely be granted in their pre-application advice, only for the proposal to be turned down by either the planning department of the committee.

On the face of it, this isn’t a particularly controversial application though, is it? Existing football ground replacing one stand with another that’s not hugely different. I’d imagine the South Stand at the Gate (never mind the Lansdown) was more of a change - and that was never really in doubt.

The R###s have managed to make it controversial by their inept approach to the whole affair, and by so blatantly ignoring the processes that everyone has to go through for these things.

But ultimately it will get approval, won’t it? Albeit (hopefully!) with some amendments. 

[Monkeh]

2 hours ago, Miah Dennehy said:

I remember the BCC councillor who turned up to a meeting in a City shirt during a discussion on planning proposals for Rovers new stadium- don't ask me which one, I've lost count on that one- incredibly unprofessional but it had no bearing on the outcome whatsoever. I would imagine plenty of councillors support one or the other (glad that they do) , but the perception by some City fans that BCC is pro Rovers and by some Rovers fans that is pro City really simply isn't true. The same goes for the imagined bias of the Evening Post and Radio Bristol. I  spend a bit of time in Glasgow where fans of Celtic and Rangers accuse organisations of bias toward one team or the other and fans of Partick and Queens Park accuse them of bias towrds the old firm. I suspect the same accusations get made in Sheffield, Liverpool, Stoke, Birmingham etc etc.

Mind you, just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you

It's only pro rovers when decisions go against city,

The council are pretty down the middle and have to apply the law

[CiderJar]

10 hours ago, BS13 Robin said:

I built better with my Meccano set back in the 70s ffs

Sure, but the Championship was not in existence back then so how could you have known it to be Championship ready?

[Eddie Hitler]

3 hours ago, Miah Dennehy said:

I remember the BCC councillor who turned up to a meeting in a City shirt during a discussion on planning proposals for Rovers new stadium- don't ask me which one, I've lost count on that one- incredibly unprofessional but it had no bearing on the outcome whatsoever. I would imagine plenty of councillors support one or the other (glad that they do) , but the perception by some City fans that BCC is pro Rovers and by some Rovers fans that is pro City really simply isn't true. The same goes for the imagined bias of the Evening Post and Radio Bristol. I  spend a bit of time in Glasgow where fans of Celtic and Rangers accuse organisations of bias toward one team or the other and fans of Partick and Queens Park accuse them of bias towrds the old firm. I suspect the same accusations get made in Sheffield, Liverpool, Stoke, Birmingham etc etc.

Mind you, just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you

 

IMO the BEP certainly used to have a pro-Rovers bias, which was especially noticeable when there were arrests for football related trouble: City arrests headlined but Rovers arrests quietly tucked away, but to be entirely fair I haven't noticed that for a few years now.

Other than that I agree.

[slartibartfast]

4 hours ago, Red Homer said:

You'd be surprised Graham at the number of cases that come across my desk where the LPA have indicated that permission is likely be granted in their pre-application advice, only for the proposal to be turned down by either the planning department of the committee.

[redysteadygo]

3 hours ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

IMO the BEP certainly used to have a pro-Rovers bias, which was especially noticeable when there were arrests for football related trouble: City arrests headlined but Rovers arrests quietly tucked away, but to be entirely fair I haven't noticed that for a few years now.

Other than that I agree.

Does anyone read the "Post" now to know what it's reporting?

[Topper 123]

4 hours ago, italian dave said:

On the face of it, this isn’t a particularly controversial application though, is it? Existing football ground replacing one stand with another that’s not hugely different. I’d imagine the South Stand at the Gate (never mind the Lansdown) was more of a change - and that was never really in doubt.

The R###s have managed to make it controversial by their inept approach to the whole affair, and by so blatantly ignoring the processes that everyone has to go through for these things.

But ultimately it will get approval, won’t it? Albeit (hopefully!) with some amendments. 

Is this not setting a precedent to future applications in Bristol maybe not so big  where by council application is in for build but told not too commence but hey fack council I’ll build anyway ?

[italian dave]

19 minutes ago, Topper 123 said:

Is this not setting a precedent to future applications in Bristol maybe not so big  where by council application is in for build but told not too commence but hey fack council I’ll build anyway ?

I think it will, as others have said, royally piss off the planning officers and councillors. But ultimately I don't believe that the planners can do otherwise than consider the application on its merit. In other words, they can't refuse something that would otherwise get consent, just because it's already built. 

Not least because they'd only lose on appeal.

 

[RedRock]

Served a few Enforcement/Stop Notices in my early days. Assume that is still an option for the Council. 

Possible The Sags have some form of political assurance that won’t be happening as that Meccano Kit  would be very fiddly to dismantle. All a bit nawty.

As ever, fingers pointed at the planners, but anyone with half a brain could see their initial submission was totally inadequate…. and by the sound of things the Council are STILL waiting for information to be supplied material to the assessment of the proposals. The blame here lies - as on most occasions - with the Applicant together with the politicians for desperately under-resourcing Planning Departments.