Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 22, 2017 11:26:27 GMT
In response to a number of requests regarding an update on our training ground, we can comment as follows.
Pre-application consultation is ongoing with South Gloucestershire Council for the new training ground.
We expect their written feedback on proposals imminently, which will frame the parameters for the development, and enable us to progress to submission of a full planning application.
We await the outcome of South Gloucestershire Council’s deliberations and out of respect for the local community work will not commence until official approval has been received.
AddThis Sharing Buttons Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to More
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 11:33:05 GMT
Wael gave the same answer when asked directly a couple of weeks ago.
I want to believe it but can't shake the suspicion it is convenient.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 11:37:57 GMT
Perhaps the definition of "Training Ground" is too narrow? Hence a more complicated planning application Maybe
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Aug 22, 2017 11:38:35 GMT
Work won't commence until official approval out of respect for the local community? What a weird thing to write? ? Odd, odd statement.
|
|
bloogas
Joined: July 2016
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by bloogas on Aug 22, 2017 11:57:12 GMT
Work won't commence until official approval out of respect for the local community? What a weird thing to write? ? Odd, odd statement. You may not believe it - that's your prerogative - but why "odd" & "weird"?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 12:03:59 GMT
Work won't commence until official approval out of respect for the local community? What a weird thing to write? ? Odd, odd statement. That bit is an odd statement, I agree: work can't legally start until they've got plannng permission - nothing to do with respect. Maybe it's aimed at heading off any 'but they could get and do preparatory or xxx work outwith the building work' comments. Other than that, it sounds like a hugely credible description and timeline of the planning process. Talks and agreement about what might be acceptable -> detailed application -> (likely amendments) -> formal decision. When they put in for permission to change the use restrictions, I banged on about 'but that proposed building isn't what we'd want'. That's what they're working through.
|
|
|
Post by leebrownsrightboot on Aug 22, 2017 12:04:52 GMT
The only thing I'm not sure on (and it's probably more to do with my understanding of planning applications than anything else) is didn't we challenge the conditions that were on the existing planning and get those removed last December? If so why are we submitting a new plan now? Why didn't we do it all in one hit?
Also regardless of what people think of the content it's good to see another response to requests for updates. Regardless of whether we like what we are getting the communication from this board is 10X better than any of the sh*t statements served up under Higgs.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 12:13:55 GMT
The only thing I'm not sure on (and it's probably more to do with my understanding of planning applications than anything else) is didn't we challenge the conditions that were on the existing planning and get those removed last December? If so why are we submitting a new plan now? Why didn't we do it all in one hit? Also regardless of what people think of the content it's good to see another response to requests for updates. Regardless of whether we like what we are getting the communication from this board is 10X better than any of the sh*t statements served up under Higgs. I think that was my thought at the time. 'Appen the sale of the land was dependent on the lifting of restrictions and they didn't want to delay that, or go to the expense and time involved in building design and approval ahead of [before completing on the] buying of the land.
|
|
|
Post by leebrownsrightboot on Aug 22, 2017 12:16:48 GMT
The only thing I'm not sure on (and it's probably more to do with my understanding of planning applications than anything else) is didn't we challenge the conditions that were on the existing planning and get those removed last December? If so why are we submitting a new plan now? Why didn't we do it all in one hit? Also regardless of what people think of the content it's good to see another response to requests for updates. Regardless of whether we like what we are getting the communication from this board is 10X better than any of the sh*t statements served up under Higgs. I think that was my thought at the time. 'Appen the sale of the land was dependent on the lifting of restrictions and they didn't want to delay that, or go to the expense and time involved in building design and approval ahead of [before completing on the] buying of the land. Makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Aug 22, 2017 13:40:46 GMT
Only another 7 years and it will have dragged on as long as the UWE saga
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Aug 22, 2017 14:12:53 GMT
Only another 7 years and it will have dragged on as long as the UWE saga How long do you think it will be possible to drag it out? At what point does the pressure really start to ramp up?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 14:40:30 GMT
I think the work carried out bit is with reference to the pitches. Without building anything we could start work on the pitches to make them as good as possible. That's my take anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 14:52:26 GMT
I think the work carried out bit is with reference to the pitches. Without building anything we could start work on the pitches to make them as good as possible. That's my take anyway. Yes but there isn't really any point in case the permission gets turned down. If we really are waiting on planning outcomes then its fair enough, I think.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 14:53:23 GMT
Call me an old cynic, but I may have had those preliminary discussions with planners before whopping my wad on the counter.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 15:02:16 GMT
Call me an old cynic, but I may have had those preliminary discussions with planners before whopping my wad on the counter. Saucy.
|
|
|
Post by pirate49 on Aug 22, 2017 16:16:00 GMT
If this ever comes to fruition I hope they drop the bluddy word COLONY. It brings to mind either a group of cast out lepers or aspirations of colonial expansion. Surely there's a better name.
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Aug 22, 2017 16:55:50 GMT
Save money and drop the 'Y'..
|
|
harrybuckle
Always look on the bright side
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,425
|
Post by harrybuckle on Aug 22, 2017 17:11:07 GMT
If this ever comes to fruition I hope they drop the bluddy word COLONY. It brings to mind either a group of cast out lepers or aspirations of colonial expansion. Surely there's a better name. Dunfordville after Dennis maybe
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 17:46:46 GMT
Wael gave the same answer when asked directly a couple of weeks ago. I want to believe it but can't shake the suspicion it is convenient. It's true that the pre application has been submitted. It's part of the work which remains unpaid.
|
|
womble
Arthur Cartlidge
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 300
|
Post by womble on Aug 22, 2017 18:24:58 GMT
Wael gave the same answer when asked directly a couple of weeks ago. I want to believe it but can't shake the suspicion it is convenient. It's true that the pre application has been submitted. It's part of the work which remains unpaid. If that's the case, then the wait for a response will be a long one. Planning applications without payment don't get processed.
|
|