Fisher: Butts Park Arena is our preffered option (9 Viewers)

theferret · Jun 3, 2016

clint van damme said:
they're not mate, and that's why until I see a plan which offers potential solutions to these issues and an outline on how it's all going to be funded I'll remain very sceptical.
I hope they're forthcoming because it's my preferred option as well.

The parking argument is bogus though. There are other larger city centre grounds (think 55,000 at St James Park, 32,000 at Bramall Lane, 80,000 in Cardiff). Look at aerial views of St James Park and see how much on site parking there is.

I read something once about Newcastle, it was a study about how people got to the game. Can't find it now which is annoying, but it basically said that 30% or thereabouts travel to the game by car - and there is an average 2.5 people per car. At BPA, for a full house that would translate to 3000 cars, but they wouldn't be concentrated around the stadium area - they would be dispersed and many would use city centre car parks. There would also be businesses, schools etc who would cash in by opening car parks - and there would also be some street parking.

A city centre ground is by default close to the main train station, it is by default on every bus route in the city. There would be park and ride, coach services from outlying areas, and let's not forget, the ground would be within walking distance of many residential areas including Earlsdon, Spon End, parts of Coundon, Radford, Cheylesmore, Hillfields etc. Traffic could also disperse easily, because by using city centre parking those people would enter and exit the city centre via the 9 different ring road exits. I just don't see how it would an issue at all.

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · Jun 3, 2016

clint van damme said:
they're not mate, and that's why until I see a plan which offers potential solutions to these issues and an outline on how it's all going to be funded I'll remain very sceptical.
I hope they're forthcoming because it's my preferred option as well.

I'm completely sceptical too mate, but unless we get behind this, it won't have any motion. SISU have let us down so many times, but we have to have some belief.

It's like Brexit in parallel form. We don't know what might happen if we move, so let's just stay at the Ricoh on a piece of shit deal. - Fuck no, It isn't the best option at all!

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · Jun 3, 2016

Captain Dart said:
No one has ever said that. But Jon Sharp the Chairman of Cov Rugby made a statement that pretty well buries the possibility of a 25K stadium...

http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/consultative-group-meeting-minutes-3132807.aspx

You raise a valid point Captain.

However, out of everything in those minutes, pretty much the most negative thing has been raised here. Currently they have one stand with three open sides. They could still find a way to condense this on match days. Plus if we were playing there, I think their attendences would rise anyway. Certainly if we had Scunthrope away, I might be more tempted for a pint of ten watching the rugby!

As I've said previously, they should trial a safe standing/rail seating agreement with the FL. It would also make the stadium more appealing, and get more fans in. If Celtic can do it in their Premier League, why can't we?

Nick · Jun 3, 2016

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
You raise a valid point Captain.

However, out of everything in those minutes, pretty much the most negative thing has been raised here. Currently they have one stand with three open sides. They could still find a way to condense this on match days. Plus if we were playing there, I think their attendences would rise anyway. Certainly if we had Scunthrope away, I might be more tempted for a pint of ten watching the rugby!

As I've said previously, they should trial a safe standing/rail seating agreement with the FL. It would also make the stadium more appealing, and get more fans in. If Celtic can do it in their Premier League, why can't we?

I think they mentioned about safe standing and speaking with the FA about it.

You are right about people more inclined to go, I'd definitely want to go more for some beers to watch the rugby.

clint van damme · Jun 3, 2016

Ferret, I ve said it a few times, it's not the parking its pedestrian access, currently very poor with no access from Albany Rd any more.. It's not insurmountable but all of these problems take time and money to find solutions to.

Nick has mentioned safe standing and if the Celtic experiment goes well next season I'm sure that will be rolled out into England so that will help with the capacity issues.

But as I've also stated before, even with sufficient funding infrastructure solutions are going to require a high level of co-operation between SISU and CCC- we all know how that could end up!

armybike · Jun 3, 2016

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
I don't want to make personal judgments on anyone, but I strongly feel that It's beyond belief that any coventry fan who is challenging a proposed move back to the city centre in a co-operation with the local rugby team who got equally fucked over by the Wasps by picking up on parking issues can actually be serious.

How can anyone not get behind this? Are we so negative from all the false promises we've been made that we just don't believe anything good is possible anymore?

Challenging the proposed move?

It's been indicated that parking/access won't be an issues.

Due to the location I'm not able to see how this can be said with such certainty.

Are you 100% sure that such issues won't arise.

It's one thing have blind faith in your club, but a totally different one when looking at proposals for new developments.

I'm not being dismissive of the idea, but even SISU and CRFC have acknowledged there are hurdles to overcome and it's currently only at the discussion stage.

I think this proposal needs to be kept in perspective.

Deleted member 5849 · Jun 3, 2016

clint van damme said:
But as I've also stated before, even with sufficient funding infrastructure solutions are going to require a high level of co-operation between SISU and CCC- we all know how that could end up!

Which is why we have to show that if problems can be surmounted, we want everyone to run with it.

Deleted member 5849 · Jun 3, 2016

armybike said:
I'm not being dismissive of the idea

Can I be in the middle ground, and focus on this?

I agree that obviously there are issues, but I do think the first hurdle is to push our club to move beyond the rhetoric to actually getting something worked up. As such, our role is maybe not to be overly negative about it. Regardless of shenanigans elsewhere... our club needs to stop talking, and start doing. Here's a proposal that (philosophically at least) offers so much that we'd want, that we probably need to push them to move forward with it beyond the occasional soundbyte.

ccfcway · Jun 3, 2016

Grendel said:
The parking for the Ricoh is wholly unsatisfactory - access tonight will be hugely problematic if 38,000 turned up in cars. You know full well they assume a percentage only will be by car - it's a red herring - chat to one of your council followers on twitter - how bout that imbecile Rachael Lancaster - she used to be transport - your a mate of hers aren't you?

yet on another thread

"I would ask this thread does not descend into the normal divergent blame game nonsense"

clint van damme · Jun 3, 2016

trust me, if SISU release a plan tomorrow for the funding of a 25,000 minimum stadium at the Butts with a moving in date and solutions to all potential infrastructure issues that has CRFc on board I will be fucking delighted - but that currently seems along way away.

theferret · Jun 3, 2016

armybike said:
Challenging the proposed move?

It's been indicated that parking/access won't be an issues.

Due to the location I'm not able to see how this can be said with such certainty.

Are you 100% sure that such issues won't arise.

It's one thing have blind faith in your club, but a totally different one when looking at proposals for new developments.

I'm not being dismissive of the idea, but even SISU and CRFC have acknowledged there are hurdles to overcome and it's currently only at the discussion stage.

I think this proposal needs to be kept in perspective.

Of course there are obstacles, that's a given. I just think parking as a standalone issue isn't one of them for the reasons I gave above. In fact parking is more of an issue at an edge of town site because more people need to use a car to get there, and parking has to be provided on site because outside of that there will be few options and widespread restrictions. I think the perception of parking issues will be more difficult to overcome than the parking issue itself which I believe to be a non-issue.

Access? Perhaps. The new retirement home development has come at the wrong time, and yes there will also be political challenges. All surmountable in my opinion which is why I think we should back it. They'll be plenty of other people who will find reasons to object, so I think at the very least the fans should put on a united front.

Grendel · Jun 3, 2016

ccfcway said:
yet on another thread

"I would ask this thread does not descend into the normal divergent blame game nonsense"

Interesting you defend Armybike a poster who has numerous council contacts on social media as well as frequent engaged dialogue with Simon Gilbert and is viewed on the wasps forum as a torchbearer for their cause.

As usual you offer no vision nothing constructive and continue to passively lay back and accept the inevitable.

Your avatar is fitting. A fake of a hapless loser. It's a fitting choice

ccfcway · Jun 3, 2016

Grendel said:
Interesting you defend Armybike a poster who has numerous council contacts on social media as well as frequent engaged dialogue with Simon Gilbert and is viewed on the wasps forum as a torchbearer for their cause.

As usual you offer no vision nothing constructive and continue to passively lay back and accept the inevitable.

Your avatar is fitting. A fake of a hapless loser. It's a fitting choice

i'm not defending anyone, I am pointing out you keep posting threads about not insulting anyone, then keep insulting everyone.

How am I accepting the inevitable ?

martcov · Jun 3, 2016

theferret said:
The parking argument is bogus though. There are other larger city centre grounds (think 55,000 at St James Park, 32,000 at Bramall Lane, 80,000 in Cardiff). Look at aerial views of St James Park and see how much on site parking there is.

I read something once about Newcastle, it was a study about how people got to the game. Can't find it now which is annoying, but it basically said that 30% or thereabouts travel to the game by car - and there is an average 2.5 people per car. At BPA, for a full house that would translate to 3000 cars, but they wouldn't be concentrated around the stadium area - they would be dispersed and many would use city centre car parks. There would also be businesses, schools etc who would cash in by opening car parks - and there would also be some street parking.

A city centre ground is by default close to the main train station, it is by default on every bus route in the city. There would be park and ride, coach services from outlying areas, and let's not forget, the ground would be within walking distance of many residential areas including Earlsdon, Spon End, parts of Coundon, Radford, Cheylesmore, Hillfields etc. Traffic could also disperse easily, because by using city centre parking those people would enter and exit the city centre via the 9 different ring road exits. I just don't see how it would an issue at all.

It is a long enough walk to many of the places you name and although car drivers could exit the ring road at many points, they can only enter at 1.

clint van damme · Jun 3, 2016

theferret said:
Of course there are obstacles, that's a given. I just think parking as a standalone issue isn't one of them for the reasons I gave above. In fact parking is more of an issue at an edge of town site because more people need to use a car to get there, and parking has to be provided on site because outside of that there will be few options and widespread restrictions. I think the perception of parking issues will be more difficult to overcome than the parking issue itself which I believe to be a non-issue.

Access? Perhaps. The new retirement home development has come at the wrong time, and yes there will also be political challenges. All surmountable in my opinion which is why I think we should back it. They'll be plenty of other people who will find reasons to object, so I think at the very least the fans should put on a united front.

Agreed, but SISU now need to put some meat on the bones of this option to give us something to get behind.

Deleted member 5849 · Jun 3, 2016

clint van damme said:
Agreed, but SISU now need to put some meat on the bones of this option to give us something to get behind.

Fine.

So it turns out we're all singing from the same hymn sheet when it comes down to it, aren't we?

theferret · Jun 3, 2016

martcov said:
It is a long enough walk to many of the places you name and although car drivers could exit the ring road at many points, they can only enter at 1.

Why? If I chose to park at Belgrade Plaza and walk, I wonder enter via the Radford Road and exit the same way? Same goes for any other city centre car park, or I could approach from the other side a park in a private car park - plenty of those would pop-up

Some of those areas are a good walk true, but within a one mile radius of BPA there are thousands of homes. I currently walk 1.5 miles to the Ricoh - or sometimes I drive. City centre ground I leave the car at home and have a skinful

martcov · Jun 3, 2016

Deleted member 5849 said:
Which is why we have to show that if problems can be surmounted, we want everyone to run with it.

I still think it may be a dead end. We get stuck in a tight ground presumably depending on the other half of the partnership wanting to expand or allowing expansion should we need it. Even if get to around 15000 that may not be enough and with success we will be too constrained. I would at best walk with it and play along, still hoping for a billionaire benefactor and a better solution to turn up.

clint van damme · Jun 3, 2016

Deleted member 5849 said:
Fine.

So it turns out we're all singing from the same hymn sheet when it comes down to it, aren't we?

all but the ones who matter, the clubs owners. Sorry for my cynicism.Hopefully they'll surprise me.

Deleted member 5849 · Jun 3, 2016

martcov said:
I still think it may be a dead end. We get stuck in a tight ground presumably depending on the other half of the partnership wanting to expand or allowing expansion should we need it. Even if get to around 15000 that may not be enough and with success we will be too constrained. I would at best walk with it and play along, still hoping for a billionaire benefactor and a better solution to turn up.

The first push is a temporary ground we can call home. Re-find our identity.

Second push once that happens is to expand or find somewhere else... but we need to re-connect with Coventry,

martcov · Jun 3, 2016

theferret said:
Why? If I chose to park at Belgrade Plaza and walk, I wonder enter via the Radford Road and exit the same way? Same goes for any other city centre car park, or I could approach from the other side a park in a private car park - plenty of those would pop-up

Some of those areas are a good walk true, but within a one mile radius of BPA there are thousands of homes. I currently walk 1.5 miles to the Ricoh - or sometimes I drive. City centre ground I leave the car at home and have a skinful

It is a pretty built up area - true - but not much room for car parks springing up. Filling the ground wouldn't be a problem ( with a reasonable team ) because of the large population near by. People from further away would have problems if they came by car.

Deleted member 5849 · Jun 3, 2016

martcov said:
It is a pretty built up area - true - but not much room for car parks springing up. Filling the ground wouldn't be a problem ( with a reasonable team ) because of the large population near by. People from further away would have problems if they came by car.

Walkable from the train station though.

In so many ways it opens up attendance to everyone from the suburbs (they can all get a bus into the city centre) and anyone from Rugby, Leamington, London, Manchester...

theferret · Jun 3, 2016

martcov said:
I still think it may be a dead end. We get stuck in a tight ground presumably depending on the other half of the partnership wanting to expand or allowing expansion should we need it. Even if get to around 15000 that may not be enough and with success we will be too constrained. I would at best walk with it and play along, still hoping for a billionaire benefactor and a better solution to turn up.

15,000 is not enough, that is broadly accepted - but it is evident that the club want more. 25K would be great, so we should work with the club and make is clear that is what we want. Tight ground? Would take that any day. Proper football ground, unlike many of the modern efforts where the dirt track is usually so large you could play another game on it.

martcov · Jun 3, 2016

Deleted member 5849 said:
The first push is a temporary ground we can call home. Re-find our identity.

Second push once that happens is to expand or find somewhere else... but we need to re-connect with Coventry,

It is "my" area - where my family comes from and near where I grew up, so for me it would be re-connecting as you say. I now live far away and can see me have problems getting a ticket - good for a hedge fund, but not very 'democratic' in the sense of all fans being able to get to see the team.

Otis · Jun 3, 2016

The parking thing is indeed slightly bogus. The problem as I have said before is that of local residents opposing due to the fact they will believe that they won't be able to get to and from their homes around and leading up to game time.

armybike · Jun 3, 2016

theferret said:
Of course there are obstacles, that's a given. I just think parking as a standalone issue isn't one of them for the reasons I gave above. In fact parking is more of an issue at an edge of town site because more people need to use a car to get there, and parking has to be provided on site because outside of that there will be few options and widespread restrictions. I think the perception of parking issues will be more difficult to overcome than the parking issue itself which I believe to be a non-issue.

Access? Perhaps. The new retirement home development has come at the wrong time, and yes there will also be political challenges. All surmountable in my opinion which is why I think we should back it. They'll be plenty of other people who will find reasons to object, so I think at the very least the fans should put on a united front.

I just think we need to be grounded about the proposal at this stage.

We've had to may false dawns and my concern is this >>potentially<< could be another.

Not a malicious one, but that it could be unworkable or the situation may not pan out as hoped.

Yes, we all accept we're in a shit state situation but I think we need to get to the point where at the very least the plans are available to view and the timeframe around possible development announced before it's viewed as the solution to our playing venue problems.

1940oldfive · Jun 3, 2016

skybluegod said:
Wait so TF is being attacked for actually having a back-up plan? Now I don't like the guy, but if he had come out and said, "Butts is the only option" and then negotiaions failed, then he would be attacked too...
The Ricoh is not viable- it is not an option to stay- 15% of matchday revenue that't taking the piss and is non-negotiable.
Outside the city option- yes the Butts may just be a smokescreen for us justifying the move out of the city, but the fact that there have been negotiations suggests there is actually legs in this deal.
Also I believe this information came from the minutes of the last SCG minutes, if you look at Armybikes thread from yesterday this is all mentioned: http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...eeting-minutes-Wednesday-25th-may-2016.65572/

While there have been many problems in the past, TF and CA seem to be very honest about that they want, and have been clear: Butts is the preferred option, but at a very early stage in development, and they wish to extend the lease at the Higgs. They have also planned an alternative should both of these options fall through, what is the problem?

and farther Christmas still comes down the chimney

theferret · Jun 3, 2016

martcov said:
It is a pretty built up area - true - but not much room for car parks springing up. Filling the ground wouldn't be a problem ( with a reasonable team ) because of the large population near by. People from further away would have problems if they came by car.

I was referring to existing car parks used by businesses, not new ones. People coming from out of town would have no issues - they drive to the city centre, park, and then walk to the ground. How does St James Park cope when 55,000 people rock up to a ground right in the city centre with about 200 on site parking spaces? Access in and out of Coventry city centre is a good deal easier that it is in Newcastle too. The answer of course is that the vast majority don't drive and those that do park in city centre car parks or small private car parks.

martcov · Jun 3, 2016

The Broomfield Tavern is a wreck at the moment ( don't know whether it is still trading - looked closed to me ), but I think if I had money I would maybe looking at the possibility of buying it... Might be worth a punt...

Deleted member 5849 · Jun 3, 2016

martcov said:
It is "my" area - where my family comes from and near where I grew up, so for me it would be re-connecting as you say. I now live far away and can see me have problems getting a ticket - good for a hedge fund, but not very 'democratic' in the sense of all fans being able to get to see the team.

tbh, long term building a bit of pent-up demand could be the best thing to happen to us. Democratic never works anyway - we'd get more fans than fill the Ricoh if we ever got to Wembley, all come out the woodwork. If, wherever we play, I can't get a match ticket because I won't buy a season ticket then sure, it'll piss me off, but I'd always give first dibs to those who deserve it more than me... even if it is just because I work on Saturdays, or live in another country.

The way the club's going, problems getting a ticket isn't a problem, it's a dream!

armybike · Jun 3, 2016

martcov said:
The Broomfield Tavern is a wreck at the moment ( don't know whether it is still trading - looked closed to me ), but I think if I had money I would maybe looking at the possibility of buying it... Might be worth a punt...

It's just been awarded the CAMRA Coventry and District pub of the year award

http://www.coventry.camra.org.uk

Captain Dart · Jun 3, 2016

theferret said:
I was referring to existing car parks used by businesses, not new ones. People coming from out of town would have no issues - they drive to the city centre, park, and then walk to the ground. How does St James Park cope when 55,000 people rock up to a ground right in the city centre with about 200 on site parking spaces? Access in and out of Coventry city centre is a good deal easier that it is in Newcastle too. The answer of course is that the vast majority don't drive and those that do park in city centre car parks or small private car parks.

How does this help CCFC they are dissatisfied with 3K they get from Ricoh parking, they will get bugger all extra from the 100 or so spaces that might be squeezed onto the Butts site.

There is always a contradiction at the heart of SISU's arguments.

theferret · Jun 3, 2016

martcov said:
The Broomfield Tavern is a wreck at the moment ( don't know whether it is still trading - looked closed to me ), but I think if I had money I would maybe looking at the possibility of buying it... Might be worth a punt...

I think I read somewhere a while ago that the site was gong to be redeveloped. Not sure though.

On a separate note, isn't the hotel and office complex next to BPA still up for sale? Won't happen, but if the financial clout was there it would be a good idea to buy it. On site offices, a small multi-storey car park and long term tenants who would provide a nice residual rent income. Getting a bit ahead of myself there though..

martcov · Jun 3, 2016

Deleted member 5849 said:
tbh, long term building a bit of pent-up demand could be the best thing to happen to us. Democratic never works anyway - we'd get more fans than fill the Ricoh if we ever got to Wembley, all come out the woodwork. If, wherever we play, I can't get a match ticket because I won't buy a season ticket then sure, it'll piss me off, but I'd always give first dibs to those who deserve it more than me... even if it is just because I work on Saturdays, or live in another country.

The way the club's going, problems getting a ticket isn't a problem, it's a dream!

Time will tell, but I remain sceptical ...

clint van damme · Jun 3, 2016

theferret said:
I think I read somewhere a while ago that the site was gong to be redeveloped. Not sure though.

On a separate note, isn't the hotel and office complex next to BPA still up for sale? Won't happen, but if the financial clout was there it would be a good idea to buy it. On site offices, a small multi-storey car park and long term tenants who would provide a nice residual rent income. Getting a bit ahead of myself there though..

Not sure if it's for sale but the hotel is a listed building, not sure if that includes the theatre as well.

Fisher: Butts Park Arena is our preffered option (9 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency