Supporters' group tells Coventry City FC owners to clarify stadium plans (23 Viewers)

Forums New posts
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
Sick Boy said:
How is that in in anyway written with 'sisu tinted glasses'.

I thought it was pretty obvious I meant sports team.
Click to expand...

who cares if we are not the biggest sports team in the city, will that detract from us supporting them?
As for sisu tinted glasses you know what I mean! don't make out your that stupid:facepalm:
 
Calista

Calista

Well-Known Member
Sorry to distract from what we can all agree has been a very productive debate, by posting something on-topic.

Apologies if it’s already been raised by someone else, but I’ve noticed that a few days ago Rugby Borough Council published their proposed Local Plan for consultation:
https://www.rugby.gov.uk/downloads/file/893/local_plan_preferred_options_for_consultation

It’s 88 pages and I haven’t gone through it with a fine toothcomb, but shockingly there appears to be no mention of a stadium anywhere :eek:

However, on page 17 you’ll see that they’ve decided to take the assorted parcels of land around the M6 Junction 2, M69 and A46 out of the Green Belt. It says “The Submission Local Plan will consider as recommended by the JGBR the types of development acceptable in those locations to minimise the impact their removal would have on the remaining Green Belt”. That does leave the door open I think, and might (just might) have been prompted by representations from our esteemed chairman, who is good at building relationships.

This is a consultation document, so if you feel miffed that no site has been specifically set aside by Rugby Borough Council for Coventry’s football team, write in now and express your anger.
 
italiahorse

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
Norman Lockhart said:
Sorry to distract from what we can all agree has been a very productive debate, by posting something on-topic.

Apologies if it’s already been raised by someone else, but I’ve noticed that a few days ago Rugby Borough Council published their proposed Local Plan for consultation:
https://www.rugby.gov.uk/downloads/file/893/local_plan_preferred_options_for_consultation

It’s 88 pages and I haven’t gone through it with a fine toothcomb, but shockingly there appears to be no mention of a stadium anywhere :eek:

However, on page 17 you’ll see that they’ve decided to take the assorted parcels of land around the M6 Junction 2, M69 and A46 out of the Green Belt. It says “The Submission Local Plan will consider as recommended by the JGBR the types of development acceptable in those locations to minimise the impact their removal would have on the remaining Green Belt”. That does leave the door open I think, and might (just might) have been prompted by representations from our esteemed chairman, who is good at building relationships.

This is a consultation document, so if you feel miffed that no site has been specifically set aside by Rugby Borough Council for Coventry’s football team, write in now and express your anger.
Click to expand...

You beat me to it :D

C6 which is the area you are talking about is too small as it is cut into 3 sections by the M6 and A46.
It looks as though there is no stadium proposal for Rugby in the draft document.

Any comment Sisu ?
 
Calista

Calista

Well-Known Member
italiahorse said:
You beat me to it :D

C6 which is the area you are talking about is too small as it is cut into 3 sections by the M6 and A46.
It looks as though there is no stadium proposal for Rugby in the draft document.

Any comment Sisu ?
Click to expand...

Not so sure about that - each of the three areas appear to be almost Ricoh-sized. But I agree that the locations in and around a complex series of junctions are awkward.

It still feels barmy to even imagine the city having two large stadiums, located at successive junctions of the M6 on the north side of town.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
italiahorse said:
You beat me to it :D

C6 which is the area you are talking about is too small as it is cut into 3 sections by the M6 and A46.
It looks as though there is no stadium proposal for Rugby in the draft document.

Any comment Sisu ?
Click to expand...

Looking at the map it looks like it's just infill of the road layout that links the M6, A46 & M69 which I would think due to access restrictions surely means that releasing it from greenbelt is a bit of a red herring whatever the development.
 
italiahorse

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
Looking at the map it looks like it's just infill of the road layout that links the M6, A46 & M69 which I would think due to access restrictions surely means that releasing it from greenbelt is a bit of a red herring whatever the development.
Click to expand...

To be honest you could fit a Ricoh sized stadium in the lower left piece and have the car park in the circular runoff from the A46 to M6 with an underpass.
 
Astute

Astute

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
But you do not know what went on - you think he sold the rights to Highfield Road. :facepalm:
Click to expand...

Is that the best you can come out with on defending Richardson?

So like each time you have said it before I will say the same again. How about showing everyone where I said it?

Why do you have to try and change the past (otherwise known as giving bullshit) to try and make a point?

How can you say that him putting our club seriously in debt and selling our home without having another one built has got nothing to do with our present situation?
 
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
Moff said:
Yes I can see the difference.

You were merely making a point by playing on single word, when it clearly wasnt what I meant. That is also petty and small minded in my opinion, not in yours. Well done you.
Click to expand...

I will maybe concede a "slightly pedantic clarification" but I can assure you it wasn't any sort of personal attack.
Can't we lighten up round here, it would be boring if everyone agreed with each other wouldn't it?
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Norman Lockhart said:
Sorry to distract from what we can all agree has been a very productive debate, by posting something on-topic.

Apologies if it’s already been raised by someone else, but I’ve noticed that a few days ago Rugby Borough Council published their proposed Local Plan for consultation:
https://www.rugby.gov.uk/downloads/file/893/local_plan_preferred_options_for_consultation

It’s 88 pages and I haven’t gone through it with a fine toothcomb, but shockingly there appears to be no mention of a stadium anywhere :eek:

However, on page 17 you’ll see that they’ve decided to take the assorted parcels of land around the M6 Junction 2, M69 and A46 out of the Green Belt. It says “The Submission Local Plan will consider as recommended by the JGBR the types of development acceptable in those locations to minimise the impact their removal would have on the remaining Green Belt”. That does leave the door open I think, and might (just might) have been prompted by representations from our esteemed chairman, who is good at building relationships.

This is a consultation document, so if you feel miffed that no site has been specifically set aside by Rugby Borough Council for Coventry’s football team, write in now and express your anger.
Click to expand...

As you say its a consultation document and could change. Is there a specific section for sports facilities in any supporting documents?

I think that there is a similar process going on at CCC due to be published in January 2016 for consultation.

You might expect that a stadium development is significant enough to warrant a separate mention in any such report issued.

Then there is the article in the CT about the BPA yesterday

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-united-fc-talks-over-10579791

its just discussions obviously but at least both clubs are prepared to confirm/discuss the talks and some of the obstacles. Could be a contradiction or an alternative to what we have been told so far

I think the Trust and fans are right to question what is going on with the new CCFC stadium and expect better answers than we have had so far. I know many on here like to focus on the mistakes made by all involved in the past but the future seems to be fraught with a lot of problems and they could begin kicking in frighteningly soon
 
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
Took me a while to determine that JGBR stands for Joint Green Belt Review & not Jiangsu Lixing General Steel Ball Co., Ltd :confused:
 
Danceswithhorses

Danceswithhorses

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
I think the Trust and fans are right to question what is going on with the new CCFC stadium and expect better answers than we have had so far.
I know many on here like to focus on the mistakes made by all involved in the past but the future seems to be fraught with a lot of problems and they could begin kicking in frighteningly soon
Click to expand...
IMHO, that's spot on, and surely we can all agree with this statement, whoever we choose to blame.
 
James Smith

James Smith

Well-Known Member
Captain Dart said:
Took me a while to determine that JGBR stands for Joint Green Belt Review & not Jiangsu Lixing General Steel Ball Co., Ltd :confused:
Click to expand...

With my waistline after lunch today it could have stood for Just Got Belt Round.
 
M

martcov

Well-Known Member
Maybe I should build a pub behind some bales of hay ( like the guy with the nice house ) in a nearby field and call it the "Castle". Do a bomb..... oops.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
Looks like they already have some, getting a bit obvious now it's a bit of pr. A bit determined ;)

Give it a few days somebody will be asked for comment to bring it up.
 
The_Coventry

The_Coventry

Member
Captain Dart said:
CT rehash of discussions on this forum, but with additional feedback from RBC

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/no-new-coventry-city-fc-10595559

Cue assorted angry comments..
Click to expand...

I really don't understand how people can't see through their agenda.

The problem is, for papers like the CT, a lot of their revenue will come from media advertising, predominantly on their website, which means every time they put a story on and we click on it we're just encouraging more of their bullshit.
 
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
The_Coventry said:
I really don't understand how people can't see through their agenda.

The problem is, for papers like the CT, a lot of their revenue will come from media advertising, predominantly on their website, which means every time they put a story on and we click on it we're just encouraging more of their bullshit.
Click to expand...

Bit like this site then☺
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
letsallsingtogether said:
Bit like this site then☺
Click to expand...
Yes, I can't stop making deals with people to suppress news and conversation :(

I just bought a rolex from the income from your bullshit *


*this is a joke,pusb Will know it's a joke. Others may struggle with the concept, so just a confirmation.
 
Astute

Astute

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
Yes, I can't stop making deals with people to suppress news and conversation :(

I just bought a rolex from the income from your bullshit *


*this is a joke,pusb Will know it's a joke. Others may struggle with the concept, so just a confirmation.
Click to expand...

So the first bit is true?
 
M

martcov

Well-Known Member
The_Coventry said:
I really don't understand how people can't see through their agenda.

The problem is, for papers like the CT, a lot of their revenue will come from media advertising, predominantly on their website, which means every time they put a story on and we click on it we're just encouraging more of their bullshit.
Click to expand...

Yes, you mean like when The Coventry Observer puts out revelations about stadium sites...... Seems to be a common ploy..... Anderson says significant progress has been made and Tim is also prone to the occasional porky to help the circulation/ clicks...
 
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 24 (members: 0, guests: 24)
Top