Soapbox: More of us will be adversely affected by a bigger Bristol City stadium
IN your edition of Saturday, April 18, you gave extensive coverage to the offer by Stephen Lansdown to provide funding for the proposed new Bristol City Football Club stadium.
Your comment column suggested that this should be regarded as a "good thing". I would ask you and your readers to consider whether to others this may be a "bad thing".
-
There are a large number of people who live within the zone that would be adversely affected by the stadium.
This includes the residents of Ashton Vale, Bower Ashton and Long Ashton. The stadium would bring noise, congestion and pollution to a wider area of people than those currently affected.
The main route between Long Ashton and Bristol would be severely congested on match days.
Mr Lansdown has offered this money as it is his choice and his pleasure to do so. The football fans who may eventually come to the stadium will do so for their own pleasure and entertainment and at their own choice.
Those who would suffer detriment from this development will have no choice. They will have to live with the consequences every day. The pleasure of a few must be balanced against the detriment for many.
BCFC say they have aspirations, and there is nothing wrong with that, but they have to be tempered by reality and consideration for others.
The reality is that BC will not make it to the Premier League this year and may not do so in the near future. The justification for the stadium is that extra room is required, but this not true at present.
The prospect of the stadium being used for world cup events is also used as a major justification. This has not even been awarded to England and there are plenty of other venues that would be considered.
This stadium would be in the wrong place for large events as it lacks the necessary transport links. Any major facility should be located near transport hubs. The roads around the site struggle to cope with normal traffic and simply could not cope with hosting a major tournament. The proposed bus rapid transit could not cope with more than a small fraction of the fans.
It would also be in the wrong place for other reasons. Why put a major structure IN a rubbish tip? What about the increased risk of flooding to the surrounding area? What about the risk of inundation from failure of the Barrow reservoir retaining walls?
The land is currently designated as green belt and as such, there is a presumption against inappropriate development. The stadium with associated housing, hotel, parking and other facilities would certainly be "inappropriate".
Mr Lansdown says he wishes to involve other partners including Bristol City Council. Of course, this would help secure his investment by increasing the number of other organisations exposed to the risk of the project.
Involvement of BCC would be quite inappropriate as the planning authority and would put council tax payers' money at risk. I trust the Bristol councillors will act responsibly and reject this proposal.
This stadium is being proposed for the wrong place and for the wrong reasons.
Many organisations such as "Hands Off Long Ashton" have been formed around Bristol to give the public a voice to oppose such developments which will greatly detract from our environment.
You can be sure that we will be opposing this. We have overwhelming support from our community and from other similar organisations, such as the Ashton Vale Heritage Group.
P R Sterland,
Chairman of "Hands Off Long Ashton".
4 Comments
by peanut pete, South Bristol
Tuesday, May 12 2009, 8:25AM
“If these protest groups had there way the Long Ashton by-pass would never have been built, the Clifton Suspension Bridge would never have happened and young lads would still be working up chimneys! you have to move with the times and the new ground will be something all local residents should be proud of”
by Richard Lane, Knowle.
Sunday, May 10 2009, 11:14PM
“The annonimous Ashton vale heritage group say my figures are wrong,
I was trying to explain that moving a stadium from a densely populated area to an area with less than a handfull of adjoining properties is bound to have the effect of affecting the greater populace less. In fact they say that their areas are already affected on matchdays, but due to the logistics of the area with no public access to the proposed new stadium I fail to see how this could affect them further.The only affect the stadium could have is it's physical presence, possible flooding is I believe being addressed.
It's rather ironic to hear people describe this as the lungs of south bristol, only a few decades ago this land was a stinking tip and the only wildlife were rats and seagulls and also a history of mining and all that went with it. To describe ashton vale as a village community is almost laughable, with a large industrial estate as the village green perhaps?
The rapid transport route does not go through the heart of the (village) and the parking provision proposed is of a much higher ratio than existing and to deny the people of Ashon Gate a little respite from 100 years with a stadium in it's midst is nothing short of nimbysm.
Agreed BCFC have been given many opportunities to modernise and extend their facilities and have taken those opportunities when possible but with the constraints of the site and modern day demands it is not possible to achieve the capacity which it previously held (43,000).
For many years the existing stadium has been the focul point of the community and people could look at it as a new beginning and centre for the community benefitting many. I would also point out that no more use of the stadium for events is planned than present use.
The present road system is also back to normal levels within 20 minutes unless the police are directing away support using the existing poor parking arrangements and does cope.
As a past resident of Ashton (6years) and with family and friends in the area, thirty years of my business carried out in this area as well as forty three years attending events at Ashton Gate then I do feel qualified to comment on these issues. And I would be prepared to meet local residents to discuss their views.”
by Ashton Vale Heritage, Ashton Vale
Thursday, May 07 2009, 11:21PM
“We fully support Mr Sterlands comments and his support for Ashton Vale. Ashton Vale is a small village community which would be destroyed if this development is agreed. Mr Lane has a right to his views, but residents of Ashton Vale also have a right to live their lives in peace, to l live in an area with much valued natural green space. Whatever your views this proposal is planned for an area covered by Green Belt policy. It is an area of important nature conservation interest, the lack of development here has in itself helped to provide an area which is abundant with rare and declining species of birds. It is considered the lungs of South Bristol. Bristol City Football Club have been given many opportunities to modernise and extend their existing facilities. On match days Long Ashton is as adversely affected as Ashton Vale. Mr Lane is not correct in his figures about less people being affected. There will not be adequate parking available, the Rapid Transit Route if agreed goes through the heart of Ashton Vale and will bring misery to many residents. The main roads do not cope well with the traffic at present, and this problem will be significantly increased when the stadium is used as an arena for major events. Its easy to make the Nimby Criticism, but if Mr Lane would like to meet any residents, he would not find even a hint of Nimby-ism. Just people knowledgeable about the area they live in and value and trying to protect what is important about it for future generations to enjoy.”
by Richard Lane, Knowle
Tuesday, May 05 2009, 10:21PM
“Mr Sterland the chair of Hands off Long Ashton has stated several opinions about the proposed new stadium which I believe warrant a response.
He states extra people will be affected by the new stadium but reality is that fewer people will be affected due to a less dense population in the proposed area.
The main roads already cope with matchday traffic and with the proposed rapid transport, pedestrian access from winterstoke rd and possible station, provision seems to be well provided for.
As for the green belt, well it's okay for a posh tennis center/ gym, a park and ride system and the continued expansion over the decades of the (village) of Long Ashton towards Bristol, so why not something many thousands of people will benefit from.
This smacks of nimbyism especially his worry over the possible flooding from a break in the walls at barrow tanks.He is no different than the major campainer against Yanley new town who has made wealth from property developement.and extended their own property within this area with the proceeds but now opposes developement near them.
To state that the club doesn't need these facilities only underlines this mans lack of knowledge when in reality many people are put off attending by poor modern day facilities and the inability to purchase enough tickets in specific areas. You need to lay foundations for success and this stadium will do this.
As for the world cup this is just speculation and if successful will benefit the whole region not just BCFC possibly even Long Ashton.
Long Aston has a great buffer zone in the shape of the A370 embankment between them and the proposed stadium and this development will have minimal if any affect on the village in my opinion.
And finally when Mr Sterland lives in Bristol and pays his rates to Bristol I suggest he has no right to tell them what to do as I have no right to tell North Somerset councilors what to do.”