Stadium Redevelopment
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 bexleydave  Barnehurst 19 Jan 18 9.15am |
   |
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave Originally posted by jeeagles
Is this from a planning department? Currently the main stand is a rusty old cow shed. This petty behaviour is typical of jobsworth council workers. Despite the fact that pretty much anything would have a nicer external appearance than the current stand they have started to pick up on details like competing motif's, corporate appearance, and not enough ironmongery. All very subjective opinions, particularly when the club has done more than simply put forward an identikit stand. Although, it looks as though there would be less to critise if we did that. Hopefully a bit more "austerity" will get rid of these bell ends. It's the job of the Planning Department to put forward a report to the Planning Committee, but it's the elected members who will make the decisions. Ascetics is part of the reference of a Planning Department/Planning Committee, subjective or not. They do, in fact, comment favourably on the curved design, in contrast to the general design of many stadia. Bearing in mind were looking to demolish housing, reduce car parking and build a huge structure in a residential area, that initial response was more favourable than we might have expected. We won't do this without keeping Croydon Council on board and it's inevitable that some compromise will be required.
Bexley Dave Can you hear the Brighton sing? I can't hear a ******* thing! "The most arrogant, obnoxious bunch of deluded little sun tanned, loafer wearing mummy's boys I've ever had the misfortune of having to listen to" (Burnley forum) |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Aray South London 19 Jan 18 6.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave Interesting read. [Link]
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
kenbarr  Jackson Heights, Queens, New York ... 19 Jan 18 7.08pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave Originally posted by Aray
Interesting read. [Link] So this is how the antis plan to attack the project. Good of them to lay their cards on the table so early. If you cant attack the mertis, attack the people presenting them. Dorking's post made it clear the demolition of either 4 or 5 homes was likely. So, how light were the details? Only if you were listening selectively.
Divorced...And LOVING it! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 19 Jan 18 7.31pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave Originally posted by kenbarr
So this is how the antis plan to attack the project. Good of them to lay their cards on the table so early. If you cant attack the mertis, attack the people presenting them. Dorking's post made it clear the demolition of either 4 or 5 homes was likely. So, how light were the details? Only if you were listening selectively. What a feeble lot of rubbish that is. Increasing the stadium by a third of its original capacity and vastly improving the infrastructure is hardly a small thing and with the disturbance of a handful of houses. Get it built and bring on the Sainsbury's end plans I say.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Penge Eagle Beckenham 19 Jan 18 8.42pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave In the new stand, I'd love a sports bar (full of Palace memorabilia) to grab some chicken wings and beers pre-match or after the game while the traffic dies down.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
|
| dorking 19 Jan 18 8.55pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave That article is ridiculously bitchy! Someone jealous of those in 'power' (well local politicians) probably wish they were the ones elected to make the decisions! So much bitterness in the article! Palace must be playing this perfectly from the sounds of it, as it sounds like they are on course for a positive result in due course if they give the Council what they want. This is presumably why Parish took so long getting everything together - in effect 'lining the ducks in a row'. So that when we are ready it should be a formality and all go as smoothly as possible. The article writer is obviously vexed that with all the best consultants and specialists, we know exactly what to say and when to say it. Makes a change from the Ron Noades years when it was a ball ache to get anything positive out of the Council because we weren't 'playing the game' properly, nudge nudge, wink, wink.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| kenbarr Jackson Heights, Queens, New York ... 19 Jan 18 9.10pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave Originally posted by dorking
That article is ridiculously bitchy! Someone jealous of those in 'power' (well local politicians) probably wish they were the ones elected to make the decisions! So much bitterness in the article! Palace must be playing this perfectly from the sounds of it, as it sounds like they are on course for a positive result in due course if they give the Council what they want. This is presumably why Parish took so long getting everything together - in effect 'lining the ducks in a row'. So that when we are ready it should be a formality and all go as smoothly as possible. The article writer is obviously vexed that with all the best consultants and specialists, we know exactly what to say and when to say it. Makes a change from the Ron Noades years when it was a ball ache to get anything positive out of the Council because we weren't 'playing the game' properly, nudge nudge, wink, wink. Everything about that article reeks of bitterness. How dare the "mighty" Crystal Palace make such a presentation? How dare they do their homework? The author must have gone in with preconceived notions and instead of reporting the facts and letting the reader decide practice selective listening and heard precisely what they wanted to hear. You are also right about Noades. He was not the most politically astute and often tried to bully council into allowing him to build a 40,000all seater with a model which quite frankly was worse than bare bones. He cared not a whit about community concerns and therefore got little accomplished. Yes, Selhurst gradually became an all-seater but moving the players entrance to where it is now created a host of safety problems, culminating with the Tottenham coach blocking an exit gate to the Main Stand and very nearly causing a dangerous crush situation in April, 1991. The driver backed up too soon and claimed Terry Venables told him to do it. It took the match commander, Chief Superintendent Crawford, to order him back where he belonged. In case you're wondering, El Tel told him no such thing, he did it on his own. I heard he was fired the next day for committing several unsafe acts behind the wheel.
Divorced...And LOVING it! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
|
| dorking 19 Jan 18 9.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave In response to an earlier question, the exhibition / consultation wasn't masses and masses of information, but everything was there that locals would have needed to see in order to form their own opinions and gain enough information as to how they and their properties would be directly affected. And it was good PR, as the club could promote all the positive things we have planned, like improving local transport to minimise the impact on matchdays, and all the environmental stuff, and community projects etc And the staff there were more than friendly, helpful and willing to answer questions if asked. Palace have clearly and are clearly holding back all the intricate details and facts and we will only find out everything when they need to tell us. This in my view is playing it perfectly. Why show your hand too early? Why release stuff when you don't need to and leave yourself open to criticism? Why give your critics and objectors the ammunition to beat you with before you have to give it - an example being the 5 houses which will have to go. Better that the club approach the householders themselves and deal with it privately and sensitively, than them finding out through the newspapers or from looking at plans online. And just like Westminster politics, it seems that paying for a bit of 'political engagement' is well worth it for developers like CPFC. I am very impressed with how this has all gone so far. I look forward to watching the webcast of the Council presentation next week. From the Inside Croydon article, it sounds like some Councillors have already seen it anyway. Perfect. Edited by dorking (19 Jan 2018 9.52pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Boooo  19 Jan 18 10.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave From what i understand, only 4 of the 5 houses can be compulsory purchased. The other, a privately owned property cannot purchased on behalf of a private company by the council. Maybe a crock of sh*te but the grapevine tells me the fella doesn't want to sell. Also i don't think Sainsbury's will sell (allow the use) the section of car park that is needed for the Main Stand. Ever since consultations started a few years back, light has always been a very big issue and will be, especially because of the height of the new proposed Main Stand. Anyone remember back in the 80's when Noades had the model of his proposed new stadium built. He put it near the doorway as you walked into the reception area of the Old Stand. We all marvelled at what we thought he was going to bring. I hope this new stand gets built and doesn't end up the bs that consistently run along side this club. Still, if all goes well with successful planning and building, it could well be ready for the 2024/25 season, if at all. All food for thought.
I refuse to believe there are that many people out there that can't spell. Too f**king lazy, that's what I think. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Aray South London 19 Jan 18 10.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave All reporters have a bias - this is a free rag so the author is writing because he/she feels strongly about the subject. What I couldn't quite determine was whether it was the council, Palace or the planning process that they were offended by. When I see the £280 million loan Everton are getting from Liverpool council I don't think we can be accused of leaning too heavily on the taxpayers' purse.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| dorking 20 Jan 18 8.41am |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave My reading of it is that they are offended that the Council are so 'developer friendly'. Digs about Councillors accepting 'perks' (which they have correctly declared) and the system of lobbying. Reads as very bitter though, perhaps they wish they were a Councillor themselves so that they could be getting the free suit, tickets or trip to Wembley as per the examples given. Isn't that how these things work though? How did Russia or Qatar get the World Cup? London got the 2012 Olympics by giving out watches and handbags to delegates in the selection committee.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 20 Jan 18 9.12am |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Stadium plans' by bexleydave Originally posted by Boooo
From what i understand, only 4 of the 5 houses can be compulsory purchased. The other, a privately owned property cannot purchased on behalf of a private company by the council. Maybe a crock of sh*te but the grapevine tells me the fella doesn't want to sell. Also i don't think Sainsbury's will sell (allow the use) the section of car park that is needed for the Main Stand. Ever since consultations started a few years back, light has always been a very big issue and will be, especially because of the height of the new proposed Main Stand. Anyone remember back in the 80's when Noades had the model of his proposed new stadium built. He put it near the doorway as you walked into the reception area of the Old Stand. We all marvelled at what we thought he was going to bring. I hope this new stand gets built and doesn't end up the bs that consistently run along side this club. Still, if all goes well with successful planning and building, it could well be ready for the 2024/25 season, if at all. All food for thought. I am under the impression that the Holmesdale Stand cost £8 Mill but I could be wrong. Also, if my recollection is not awry (It often is going back so many years !), Noades said he could raise £2.3 Mill from long-term season tickets,and £2 Mill each from Wimbledon and CPFC Grant Aid.Lottery money killed off grants hence the delay in planning permission meant that the Grant Aid was not available.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.