Potentially positive outcome for planning application.

[Fareham Grecian]

I might have guessed that you'd be the one who'd pick up on Lez's comment. While I'm not altogether sure what Lez was trying to say, or whether it was necessary to say it, you're blatently miss-quoting him with your "as Lez points out" statement. - creep! You'll never know will you whether rightwings input had any impact on the latest developements?

You have as usual completely missed the point. It has nothing to do with any impact RW has had on the development. RW has continually criticised ECC for its lack of support for the club, but the planning recommendation shows that he is wrong, and that the council values the club. Lez pointed this out, I agreed with him. Simple.

 

[Antony Moxey]

Without taking sides on anything in this he said she said spat, I'd be fairly confident that any input from Rightwing has had absolutely zero impact on the latest developments. Whether anyone considers that a good or bad thing is another discussion but as I say I don't think he's influenced anything either way.

 

[rightwing]

You have as usual completely missed the point. It has nothing to do with any impact RW has had on the development. RW has continually criticised ECC for its lack of support for the club, but the planning recommendation shows that he is wrong, and that the council values the club. Lez pointed this out, I agreed with him. Simple.

I'm glad I'm wrong. So, can you tell me the favourable terms and the period of the new lease of St. James' Park and the level of financial input that the Council is making to the scheme? Or are we going to be the only club in the country not financially supported by its local council on a redevelopment proposal?

 

[Antony Moxey]

Yeah, for once I'm with Rightwing on this. If we changed the 'City Football Club' part of our name to 'Chiefs' I'm sure we'd be sitting pretty in a 12,000 capacity stadium with 500 happy students taking advantage of generous admission schemes 30 seconds from their front door and businesses queueing up to take advantage of our excellent facilities and city centre location for their conferences, especially when, due to our location, we can point to the superb transport links close at hand meaning not only are we attracting business to the city centre but also without the cars that the council detest almost as much as they do football.

 

[richard_portland]

It looks positive, but I will be starting to celebrate when the plans are actually approved and work either begins or there is a firm date for things to begin with no third parties objecting. Hoping to be able to say well done to the council once that has happened. Fingers crossed.

I see that one supporter can speak at the meeting for up to three minutes. I wonder who the club will select to do this.

 

[Avening Posse]

It looks positive, but I will be starting to celebrate when the plans are actually approved and work either begins or there is a firm date for things to begin with no third parties objecting. Hoping to be able to say well done to the council once that has happened. Fingers crossed.

I see that one supporter can speak at the meeting for up to three minutes. I wonder who the club will select to do this.

Guessing the planning consultant for the wider proposal, I imagine the 3 mins will be dedicated to pressing home the Rochdale case point that "wider policy dictates" where internal policy conflicts. The members of the committee need to be aware of the likelihood of any costly appeal if they approve and opponents seek a Judicial Review and I think the Rochdale case gives the applicant the ammo and therefore the committee the comfort to approve.....wish I could attend but will be working

 

[David Treharne]

I see that one supporter can speak at the meeting for up to three minutes. I wonder who the club will select to do this.

In this case "supporter" is not likely to be a football fan. I imagine that in both cases it will be representatives of the developer and the main opposition group(s). In any case they'll have a maximum of six minutes to make their case (three minutes for each of the two developments) and the Council have made it clear that because of the size of the room in which the meeting is to be held visitors will be discouraged from attending, or at least providing severely limited opportunities to be one of the observers.
There would seem to be several interesting scenarios that could emerge from the eventual decision. One, as Avening has pointed out is that it is thereafter subject to judicial review. Secondly that the University and the City Council harden up on a policy for PBSA's which would include the University having some building on the campus. This would encourage their belief that providing such accommodation would eventually release housing stock back into more general use (their evidence seems to stem from a drop in the number of HMO's in the Monk's road area)
A third, and altogether more intriguing issue is however, the amount off CIL released if the plans go ahead unchanged, and whether the City Council would make any (or all) of this available to the Football Club to be used for more development of the Club infrastructure- could this provide funding for a 4G pitch for FITC which does have the advantage of being a separate entity from the Club itself.