Bristol City: It's business as usual despite Ashton Vale stadium saga
BRISTOL City has insisted it is business as usual despite the latest twist in the saga surrounding the club's proposed new stadium.
As reported in yesterday's Post the city council has decided to drop its defence of the legal challenge over the future of Ashton Vale – the site earmarked for the purpose-built stadium.
-
A computer generated image of how the proposed stadium could look
The council said it withdrew its defence of the decision by councillors last summer to split the site – allowing for Bristol City to build the all-seater stadium in the northern half of the site while the rest of the land was kept as a town green.
As a result an independent inspector will now hold a public inquiry into the future of the site.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Friday, May 31 2013
The council was defending a judicial review which had found that only half of the site was protected from development under town green status. But the council decided to pull out of the process after taking legal advice from its solicitors.
The decision means that the legal process is now completely in the hands of the firm which owns the land at Ashton Vale.
Bristol City chairman and benefactor Stephen Lansdown is one of the main shareholders of the company.
Despite the latest development in the saga Bristol City is insisting that little has changed in its position.
A spokesman said: "At the moment we are focussing on making our preparations for next season.
"As far as the club is concerned it is always going to be business as usual and the main focus will be preparing the team for next season.
"We are now focussing on the summer and the preparations for next season."
Although the latest development is a further complication in the long-running saga it may actually mean that the issue will be settled sooner than previously expected.
The club is making some changes and improvements to Ashton Gate but insists it is still looking to move to a new home as soon as possible.
Peter Abraham, the councillor who chaired the Public Rights of Way Committee that made the decision last year to split the site, said he was "saddened and frustrated" by a "seemingly never-ending series of legal challenges".
He added: "This is all the more disappointing as our decision preserved indefinitely 20 acres of land for local people to use as recreational open space, whilst leaving the other half of the land including the former tip free for development.
"Although a High Court Judge in an earlier hearing urged compromise, it is very disappointing that those concerned have preferred instead to run up ever-growing lawyers' bills – many of which will ultimately be carried by the taxpayer.
" I support this pragmatic decision today so as to begin to draw a line under this matter."
The announcement from the council came just a day after Bristol City's chairman Colin Sexstone revealed that he is standing down from his post at the club.
Mr Sextone went on to talk of his sadness that the dream of building a new stadium may never happen.
He said: "Sadly, it's down to just a few people and a number of outside organisations who have lost Bristol the chance to have a new stadium.
"It was going to be such a wonderful development opportunity but now that could be gone and that is so, so sad."
No one was available from the Save Ashton Vale Environment Group (Save) to comment on the development.
Comments
by CityClarky
Monday, May 07 2012, 9:19AM
“Funny how those objecting to the development on greenfield land, actually live in housing developments on former greenfield land.”
by THEIRONS
Sunday, May 06 2012, 4:40PM
“PE175- Good ideal
GREENMAN At least we agree on something,you are a failure.”
by PE175
Sunday, May 06 2012, 9:39AM
“@THERIONS
Why don`t you rename yourself DLC,that should satisfy your fixation with the place.”
by green_man
Sunday, May 06 2012, 1:26AM
“@ THEIRONS - I think we've been here before. Have I gone back in time??
Yes, clearly I - personnally - failed because I did not stop DLC from being built in the green belt (or made sure that it was a green design with a green management plan) - its there and has been for quite some time. I suppose you could say that I - personnally - failed on a wide range of other issues, despite contesting three general elections and numerous local elections, given that Bristol is no more sustainable and green now than 30 yrs ago when I began campaigning. I - personnally - should go round the many developments in Bristol and make sure I make a detailed submissions about every single one, supporting all the greener ones and opposing all the non-green ones. I'm just a big all-round failure, though its not been through lack of trying. Now, since we cant reverse time what have you got to say in response to my actual arguments about the present and the future and the facts I've given about the thouands of tonnes of carbon emissions per year from running a club and the tens of thousands (possibly more) emissions from building a new stadium and developing the old one? And all those other impacts I've mentioned? We can do something about these and cant do anything now about the DLC. Are you with me THEIRONS as clearly, given my record of [lack of] success and your concern about the green belt, I need your help.”
by THEIRONS
Saturday, May 05 2012, 6:33PM
“GREENMAN-In your last paragraph you could well be describing the anti-stadium brigade.And you are definitely accurate with your description, when it came to the building of the D.L.C.,.All your list of consequences apply when the building of the D.L.C. happened, did they care no they did not,so at least don't paint us Football fans as the bad guys,when middle class tennis players have proved beyond any doubt,they could not care about protecting the Green Belt because right now their is probably a game of tennis taken place on a tennis court built on green belt.And what did you and your like minded group do, nothing because you did not protect the green belt from a development,so you hang your head in shame ,because despite your utterings,you are a abject failure when it comes to protecting the green belt.The D.L.C. presents proves you are.”
by green_man
Saturday, May 05 2012, 5:30PM
“"maybe the reason the TVGers don't want this after all is nothing to do with the 'green' issue but because, they don't want development full stop."
"Neither is it anything to do with Green Issues..."
____________________________________________________________________________
Here we go again. Er... the clue is in the names: green belt; town green...
A major development has to go beyond a wetland to compensate for thousands of tonnes of carbon emissions per year in running a stadium and tens of thousands (quite possibly more) carbon emissions in construction of the new stadium and redevelopment of the old one. And dont forget there is already wildlife rich green space, including some wetland, there now!!
Is it the truth that neither club nor council nor many, many supporters give a jot about additional carbon emissions, wildlife and habitat loss, loss of finite green space, swallowing up of a more rural place into a city, noise pollution, light pollution, visual intrusion, local community open space loss etc ? They just want their development.”
by piledriver
Saturday, May 05 2012, 4:47PM
“This is not about a village green.
Neither is it anything to do with Green Issues-A Wetlands was included-Name another stadium in Britain with a Wetlands.
It's anti-stadium.
Anyone who doesn't get that is either ill informed or deluded.”
by green_man
Saturday, May 05 2012, 4:29PM
“@ BCFCfinker - "So let's get this straight, 'you' would be happy with the building of a stadium in Ashton Vale as long as it's green? "
Er...that's what I've been saying on my blog, in my contribution to the consultation and in debate on this and other websites since 2009!! Mind you if I was starting from scratch and wanting a green stadium I obviously wouldn't begin by choosing green land to build over! I dont speak for anyone but myself, though many attach labels at a whim just to suit their argument. I simply try to take a reasonable, evidence-based point of view and am very sympathetic to the position of anyone who wants to protect thier green spaces because our society - including our council - still underrates their value greatly.
@ AnotherOther - your comments sounds like denial of the facts to me. I have discussed such issues as you raise (and others) on my blog ad infinitum. And yes I have taken some account of the sort of factors you list by generalising to 'thousands of tonnes'. To run a football club produces emissions of this order of magnitude eg just to back my first fact, in 2005, the German Sport University of Cologne estimated that the German Bundesliga, the German equivalent of the English Premier League, emitted approximately 250,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases in one season ie over 13,000 tonnes per club. The factors you list are not going to significantly change the sort of scale of impacts of this kind of major development (you'd need a green stadium design and stadium management plan to pay pack its impacts over years to compensate properly). Of course, all your questions show that before decisions like this are taken all the social, environmental and economic impacts of developments should be fully and properly assessed - in this case they certainly were not and I'm likely to be one of the few people that has bothered to look into figures on carbon emissions.”
by SpinyHedgehog
Saturday, May 05 2012, 4:11PM
“@BCFCfinker
"maybe the reason the TVGers don't want this after all is nothing to do with the 'green' issue but because, they don't want development full stop."
That, sir, is the bottom line. Everything else is pure hypocrisy.”
by bristolgeoff
Saturday, May 05 2012, 3:49PM
“as i said before mr landsdown should give some land to the gyspy until he get planning permission.when he does he uses all the land fill site himself.giving some away to the gyspy and none to the village green.this is good for everyone in bristol in all aspects.but they still refuse to believe it is a good idea.23 days a year for football plus a few more maybe.is that hardship for the locals who get to use it after for many things.look at the future of what a land fill site can be turned into for the whole of bristol and sport in general”