trymer
Joined: November 2018
Posts: 2,556 
|
Post by trymer on Aug 3, 2023 9:50:46 GMT
So haven taken out a loan to pay for the stand Rovers will now have a reduced income as well....who's a clever little banker ?
|
|
trymer
Joined: November 2018
Posts: 2,556
|
Post by trymer on Aug 3, 2023 9:51:25 GMT
Maybe the space at the south end of the ground could be called the "waq gap".
|
|
syg
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,072
|
Post by syg on Aug 3, 2023 11:23:49 GMT
Why don't we re-erect the stand we just took down. I think it was unerected just a few days after our last home match. It can't take that long to re-erect an unerected erection?
|
|
TaiwanGas
Paul Bannon
Tom Ramasuts Left Foot.
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,538
|
Post by TaiwanGas on Aug 3, 2023 12:53:01 GMT
So haven taken out a loan to pay for the stand Rovers will now have a reduced income as well....who's a clever little banker ? Will just have to hope that the delay is as short as possible as the losses will multiply each home game. Not much comment on here to the BRFC announcement yesterday, mainly I guess as most had already worked out the actual situation and it did offer an apology of sorts. |
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on Aug 3, 2023 14:26:12 GMT
So haven taken out a loan to pay for the stand Rovers will now have a reduced income as well....who's a clever little banker ? Will just have to hope that the delay is as short as possible as the losses will multiply each home game. Not much comment on here to the BRFC announcement yesterday, mainly I guess as most had already worked out the actual situation and it did offer an apology of sorts. Well we are debt free again. Apart from current bills. |
|
|
|
Post by Dr John Dee on Aug 11, 2023 9:58:49 GMT
Am I the only one who isn't that bothered about the South Stand? A reduced capacity for a bit balanced against actually getting it built soonish is a gamble I would have taken to increase the capacity and facilities.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,612
|
Post by eppinggas on Aug 14, 2023 14:38:42 GMT
Am I the only one who isn't that bothered about the South Stand? A reduced capacity for a bit balanced against actually getting it built soonish is a gamble I would have taken to increase the capacity and facilities. I guess that if it's only another 2 or 3 home games that are effected, you may have a point. However if it drags on for months, it would seem like a gamble that has spectacularly backfired. The worry is (see the Wael & Hussain interview) that there does not seem to be any kind of back-up plan. Looks a little bit like it was a "fingers (and everything else available) crossed and let's hope for the best possible outcome. If the plan hits the buffers we'll have a jolly good think about what to do about it then..." You have to wonder what Hussain thinks of this? |
|
harrybuckle
Always look on the bright side
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,576
|
Post by harrybuckle on Aug 14, 2023 16:52:32 GMT
Why don't we re-erect the stand we just took down. I think it was unerected just a few days after our last home match. It can't take that long to re-erect an unerected erection? Only if you use viagra I think the site is too soft to withstand another erection! |
|
harrybuckle
Always look on the bright side
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,576
|
Post by harrybuckle on Aug 14, 2023 16:56:20 GMT
Am I the only one who isn't that bothered about the South Stand? A reduced capacity for a bit balanced against actually getting it built soonish is a gamble I would have taken to increase the capacity and facilities. How selfish you are doctor Under league regulations we have to provide 250 seats for opponents under cover so many disabled places besides what about the 500 Rovers season ticket holders who paid to sit for 23 matches? |
|
|
|
Post by Dr John Dee on Aug 15, 2023 7:07:26 GMT
Am I the only one who isn't that bothered about the South Stand? A reduced capacity for a bit balanced against actually getting it built soonish is a gamble I would have taken to increase the capacity and facilities. How selfish you are doctor Under league regulations we have to provide 250 seats for opponents under cover so many disabled places besides what about the 500 Rovers season ticket holders who paid to sit for 23 matches? That's not good. But not the end of the world for a couple of games. The club is often criticised for being not very business like. THis is business like, If it's short term pain for long term gain and it's only for say 3 or 4 matches, then I will stick my chin out and say it was worth it. If it's half the season, someone looks like a chump. If it was a permanant structure it could easily have been half the season to a full season of reduced capacity. My measure would be, will it pay for itself? |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Aug 15, 2023 15:10:55 GMT
How selfish you are doctor Under league regulations we have to provide 250 seats for opponents under cover so many disabled places besides what about the 500 Rovers season ticket holders who paid to sit for 23 matches? That's not good. But not the end of the world for a couple of games. The club is often criticised for being not very business like. THis is business like, If it's short term pain for long term gain and it's only for say 3 or 4 matches, then I will stick my chin out and say it was worth it. If it's half the season, someone looks like a chump. If it was a permanant structure it could easily have been half the season to a full season of reduced capacity. My measure would be, will it pay for itself? Surely the point is that nobody at Rovers put any careful thought into the decision to go ahead with the project. Like so many things at the club it was done on a whim. If the preparatory work had been undertaken in good time and all the facts and figures weighed up before making a decision that the risk of removing the old stand and submitting a new planning application was worth taking then I'd agree with you. But it wasn't. |
|
harrybuckle
Always look on the bright side
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,576
|
Post by harrybuckle on Aug 15, 2023 15:33:49 GMT
It appears Green Councillor in Horfield has asked for Rovers planning application to be called in so instead of a qualified planner looking at scheme the full council will look at it to decide if acceptable which will unfortunately delay matters further..a real annoying tactic to try and delay/stop the development. The Green agenda no building in my back yard!
Expect no formsl decision and therefore the Planning inspectorate(who I used to work for) in Temple Quay House Bristol will need to determine the application. An inspector will be appointed to undertake a site visit and seek views from locals.
This is bad news and puts pressure on schedule can't see stand being completed till 2024 at the earliest.
Any Horfield gasheads need to speak to the Councillor concerned expressing your views
|
|
TaiwanGas
Paul Bannon
Tom Ramasuts Left Foot.
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,538
|
Post by TaiwanGas on Aug 15, 2023 15:42:17 GMT
That's not good. But not the end of the world for a couple of games. The club is often criticised for being not very business like. THis is business like, If it's short term pain for long term gain and it's only for say 3 or 4 matches, then I will stick my chin out and say it was worth it. If it's half the season, someone looks like a chump. If it was a permanant structure it could easily have been half the season to a full season of reduced capacity. My measure would be, will it pay for itself? Surely the point is that nobody at Rovers put any careful thought into the decision to go ahead with the project. Like so many things at the club it was done on a whim. If the preparatory work had been undertaken in good time and all the facts and figures weighed up before making a decision that the risk of removing the old stand and submitting a new planning application was worth taking then I'd agree with you. But it wasn't. It’s a shocker really, embarking on what is a major building project without planning permission is mind boggling, it’s not just the expertise that is missing from the decision making, it appears common sense has also left the building, embarrassingly exposing the Boards frailties. Some seem to think that this stand will fly up with a couple of workers with cordless drill’s, but in fact it is a major structure even if it is semi-permanent. It will need to support 1,000’s of fans in safety, and we know it will come under very close scrutiny from Health & Safety before being signed off fit for the purpose, it’s still a long way to go imo. I do wonder if the Saeed’s knew of this blunder before shaking Wael’s hand. |
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Aug 15, 2023 15:44:13 GMT
It appears Green Councillor in Horfield has asked for Rovers planning application to be called in so instead of a qualified planner looking at scheme the full council will look at it to decide if acceptable which will unfortunately delay matters further..a real annoying tactic to try and delay/stop the development. The Green agenda no building in my back yard! Expect no formsl decision and therefore the Planning inspectorate(who I used to work for) in Temple Quay House Bristol will need to determine the application. An inspector will be appointed to undertake a site visit and seek views from locals. This is bad news and puts pressure on schedule can't see stand being completed till 2024 at the earliest. Any Horfield gasheads need to speak to the Councillor concerned expressing your views How do you know this is a bad thing? How do you know this will delay the decision? Could it not be possible this is a good thing and speeds the process up, if indeed there are backlogs in the standard planning process? Serious question. I don't know the difference. |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Aug 15, 2023 16:31:07 GMT
Surely the point is that nobody at Rovers put any careful thought into the decision to go ahead with the project. Like so many things at the club it was done on a whim. If the preparatory work had been undertaken in good time and all the facts and figures weighed up before making a decision that the risk of removing the old stand and submitting a new planning application was worth taking then I'd agree with you. But it wasn't. It’s a shocker really, embarking on what is a major building project without planning permission is mind boggling, it’s not just the expertise that is missing from the decision making, it appears common sense has also left the building, embarrassingly exposing the Boards frailties. Some seem to think that this stand will fly up with a couple of workers with cordless drill’s, but in fact it is a major structure even if it is semi-permanent. It will need to support 1,000’s of fans in safety, and we know it will come under very close scrutiny from Health & Safety before being signed off fit for the purpose, it’s still a long way to go imo. I do wonder if the Saeed’s knew of this blunder before shaking Wael’s hand. One thing Gasheads now have to accept is that this cult of personality at Rovers doesn't work. The "Godsend Gorringe" era wasn't fair on either Tom or Rovers it just set us up to fail. Hussain is a mature experienced entrepreneur whom I hope will expect his actions and decisions to be scrutinised by fans as part of their support of the club. He's asked Gasheads to be patient but promised at the very end of his interview "When we get the solid truth, the facts, the fans will get it immediately." At this stage we have to take him at his word and hope this means he will treat us as adults and give us bad news as well as good so we can break away from the fantasy land where we are told we are going in the right direction when one look at the league table, the P&L account or the south end of the ground tells us that isn't true. |
|
harrybuckle
Always look on the bright side
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,576
|
Post by harrybuckle on Aug 15, 2023 16:58:08 GMT
It appears Green Councillor in Horfield has asked for Rovers planning application to be called in so instead of a qualified planner looking at scheme the full council will look at it to decide if acceptable which will unfortunately delay matters further..a real annoying tactic to try and delay/stop the development. The Green agenda no building in my back yard! Expect no formsl decision and therefore the Planning inspectorate(who I used to work for) in Temple Quay House Bristol will need to determine the application. An inspector will be appointed to undertake a site visit and seek views from locals. This is bad news and puts pressure on schedule can't see stand being completed till 2024 at the earliest. Any Horfield gasheads need to speak to the Councillor concerned expressing your views How do you know this is a bad thing? How do you know this will delay the decision? Could it not be possible this is a good thing and speeds the process up, if indeed there are backlogs in the standard planning process? Serious question. I don't know the difference. I assure you it is not a tactic to speed things up. The greens are amazed at the support for the application and putting a spook in our wheel which is part of the process to ensure further delay and scrutiny by a large committee. Each local council has its own established protocols for how their planning committee operates. This could be on a geographical basis or with a single planning committee covering their whole area. Smaller or less controversial planning applications are often determined under delegated powers and can be signed off at an officer level. Planning committee is generally used to determine larger and/or more sensitive planning applications. There are several ways that an application could go to committee. This normally includes if the local councillor/ward member requests that the application is heard at committee. Larger or more complex applications and the number of objections received, can also trigger the need for the proposal to be considered at committee. Planning committees often meet monthly and agendas and timetables should be available on the council’s website. Whilst the number of people that can speak at planning committee is often limited, there is normally the opportunity for the applicant and an objector(s) to be present. This is often for a limited slot (typically 3-5 minutes) and there is generally no opportunity for questions. The planning committee will then discuss the application before making a recommendation and determining the proposal. |
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Aug 15, 2023 18:43:26 GMT
How do you know this is a bad thing? How do you know this will delay the decision? Could it not be possible this is a good thing and speeds the process up, if indeed there are backlogs in the standard planning process? Serious question. I don't know the difference. I assure you it is not a tactic to speed things up. The greens are amazed at the support for the application and putting a spook in our wheel which is part of the process to ensure further delay and scrutiny by a large committee. Each local council has its own established protocols for how their planning committee operates. This could be on a geographical basis or with a single planning committee covering their whole area. Smaller or less controversial planning applications are often determined under delegated powers and can be signed off at an officer level. Planning committee is generally used to determine larger and/or more sensitive planning applications. There are several ways that an application could go to committee. This normally includes if the local councillor/ward member requests that the application is heard at committee. Larger or more complex applications and the number of objections received, can also trigger the need for the proposal to be considered at committee. Planning committees often meet monthly and agendas and timetables should be available on the council’s website. Whilst the number of people that can speak at planning committee is often limited, there is normally the opportunity for the applicant and an objector(s) to be present. This is often for a limited slot (typically 3-5 minutes) and there is generally no opportunity for questions. The planning committee will then discuss the application before making a recommendation and determining the proposal. Thanks for taking the time to reply. However, none of this tells me the timescales, none of it tells me one method is quicker than the other, or that one is better or worse than the other. What we have now is the push on social media to try to blame someone else - "oh, it's 'The Greens', or 'NIMBYs', or the council, or generally BCC ... the planning dept ... Marvin." When in actual fact we've got no one else to blame but ourselves. - If we'd got our application in earlier it would have given us time to build over the summer. - If we'd engaged with locals it may have been smoother. - If we hadn't cleared the ground, and shrubs, and started ground work, and generally pissed off our neighbours, then there probably wouldn't be so many objections; which, incidentally, only started appearing in the last couple of weeks before the new season. - If we'd left the existing stands in place until planning permission was granted then we would have been able to accommodate a much higher capacity than we can right now. - If we'd got things right at the start there would be no room for any potential further delays. Quite frankly local residents have every right to appeal against a new structure at least twice as high as the current one, question why work has started before permission granted, and the council have ever right to deal with it the way they want. The sooner we stop trying to find others to blame, and sort ourselves out, and our own processes out, the better. |
|
|
|
Post by lostinspace on Aug 15, 2023 18:57:42 GMT
according to "bristol live" magic marvin has criticised the Green councillor for her actions, and noted that letters in support of the application have reached just over the 1000 mark far outweighing the numbers against , but don't hold your breath on a quick response to the outcome because of the backlog of applications in the system , in some cases there have been delays of over 12 months!!1
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,069
|
Post by Angas on Aug 16, 2023 8:07:11 GMT
according to "bristol live" magic marvin has criticised the Green councillor for her actions, and noted that letters in support of the application have reached just over the 1000 mark far outweighing the numbers against , but don't hold your breath on a quick response to the outcome because of the backlog of applications in the system , in some cases there have been delays of over 12 months!!1 Well of course they have. Supporters outnumber local residents by thousands. A percentage comparison might be more relevant. |
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,612
|
Post by eppinggas on Aug 16, 2023 8:18:06 GMT
according to "bristol live" magic marvin has criticised the Green councillor for her actions, and noted that letters in support of the application have reached just over the 1000 mark far outweighing the numbers against , but don't hold your breath on a quick response to the outcome because of the backlog of applications in the system , in some cases there have been delays of over 12 months!!1 Well of course they have. Supporters outnumber local residents by thousands. A percentage comparison might be more relevant. I'm upgrading my prediction for "will the South Stand will be ready on September 23rd" from 'a tad optimistic' to 'wildly optimistic'. |
|
