Town green row goes back to first inspector

“On the link front, here's something interesting to bring to the pot:
http://tinyurl.com/c5vf47v

If you look at the date, 15/01/2009 15:11:39, this indicates that 'ashton vale heritage' have indicated that they've joined 'save our green spaces' group. Were they looking for some help in preventing development on the land?

By any chance would 'save our green spaces' have suggested... 'Have you tried applying for Town Village Green status?'. I leave that to the reader to decide, but by coincidence...

Surprise, surprise, in August of 2009, we start to see the first indicators that they are going for TVG:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:XroTrm4LvNwJ:http://tinyurl.com/cqhgvs7

If you look carefully at this doc, you get the first mentions of activities that are required to get TVG and the words 'village green' (page 12).

Followed by the actual TVG application in October 2009.

Now I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that all the arguments before 2009 were about the land being 'green belt' and then in late 2009, there is talk of 'village green'.

There's a strange thing though, just where has the blog link gone from the Ashton Vale Heritage site? Surely, they haven't exhausted everything there is to say about this? The Internet is a strange beast though, once you publish something, it's generally hard to hide it and 'Ashton Vales Heritage' web provider comes up trumps:
http://tinyurl.com/c47snvx


Considering that this is a civil case and not a criminal case, the level of evidence is based on 'balance of probabilities' and that's how the TVGers have gotten to the place they are now... The TVG inspector had to make a judgement call about how convincing the evidence was.

Now if that's the case, then maybe when the TVG inspector revisits this case, maybe she should look at the timeline and make a balance of probability judgement call on how one minute (pre 2009) the anti-stadium crew are talking about 'greenbelt', they link up with 'save our green spaces', who probably know all the tricks of the trade in maintaining 'green belt', and then there is talk about 'village green' and they are all now avid TVGers. Damn strange that.

And maybe she should be reminded of her own report, paragraph 16:
http://tinyurl.com/ch3q24g

"""The only context in which it is legitimate to have regard to a subsisting planning permission or proposal for development of the land the subject of an application is in assessing the credibility of witness evidence. That is because of the possibility that witnesses might be motivated to exaggerate or even fabricate evidence, or their recollections might be subconsciously coloured, by their support, or opposition to, the proposed development."""

Looking at the timeline and what has been said pre and post 2009, is it possible that the final sentence needs looking at again?

I've presented the facts and added my own biased comments. Obviously, it could all be sheer coincidence and when this all came to light in 2008, when anti-stadium types said 'green belt, they actually meant 'village green'?”

“This is a battle for a field full of dog **** to say you are protacting the green belt is a insult you are obviously protecting your own interests which is a more fairer argument the amount of time and tax payers money that has gone into this is a joke bristol has no major sporting arena which is a shame and to be frank a embarresment”

“Time line and links relevant to this...

BCFC announce intention to move November 2007 - only indicator was that it was near current site
http://tinyurl.com/32sf78


Ashton Vale announced as the site January 2008
http://tinyurl.com/9dkymx8


BCFC engaged in public consultation
http://tinyurl.com/8zabhy8


Planning application for Ashton Vale Stadium July 2009
http://tinyurl.com/6tqhh87


TVG applications dated 22/26 October 2009
http://tinyurl.com/ch3q24g
Para 17


The Ashton Vale Stadium planning approval granted Feb 2010
http://tinyurl.com/6tqhh87


TVG report Sept 2010


Details of planning application (everything about the application)
http://tinyurl.com/9fopucm

Environmental Agency site (details about landfill sites - relevant to TVG claimed dates of closure)
http://tinyurl.com/ch6k3yb

A FOI request that confirms last input at Ashton Vale was 31st December 1991 with licence surrender 3rd November 1992

I suspect that no matter what the inspector decides, the losing side will want to contest it. Then it will come down to how deep the losing sides pockets are.”

“Harry you have a very selective memory,you are certain the land,the D.L.C.. was built on was never used for recreational purposes,yet you are unaware if the said land was green belt.And you have at least admitted, that the VG/TG status is purely to stop the stadium being built,rather than to protect the green belt.I think you meant to write the TVG application was submitted before planning permission was granted,why did the locals not submit a application for all off the land long before any development was ever suggested, with TG/VG status already in place this all bun fight would never have taken place.The only real winners in all this debacle, has been the lawyers and legal teams.It is obvious we will never agree,but such is life.”

“Simon Cook has been a good friend to BCFC as was his predecessor Barbara Janke.”

“Theirons

"Everything I write is fact". You are quite clearly prepared to make up any rubbish

The David Lloyd centre is not on their doorstep. It is separated from their doorsteps by the TVG land, a large brook and a county boundary. The David Lloyd centre land was never used as recreational space. no one's house backs onto it. No one has gates or decking onto it. I've no idea if it was ever greenbelt. But the Ashton Vlae residents won greenbelt status for the Ashton Vale fields in the 1960s after a long struggle. FACT as you like to say.

Also, the TVG was submitted before the stadium got planning permission. Another piece of untrue propaganda you repeat.”

“Harry mate the question is why the residents allowed any development of the green belt land.The answer being they were happy to have a tennis centre built on their doorsteps,where as they have wish to have a football stadium.So let us at least cut the **** that this is anything to do with protecting the green belt,when it is purely about stopping the building of the stadium.Or are you suggesting the D.L.C.,is not built on land which at the time was green belt land.”

“Theirons

The David Lloyd Centre is not on the Ashton Vale fields. It is over the border in North Somerset and separated from the Tvg fields by a large brook. If you knew anything about the land you would know that. You obviously have never been there.”

“PE175-Everything i have written is fact,i live in Whitchurch because my postcode, address says so.You are on about Whitchurch Village , which i make no claim to be a resident off .I am a twit,says a anorak from Knowle West, who fights the corner for the wealthy of Long Ashton,what a twa*.By the way just like to point out their is no D.L.C. on the TG/VG in Whitchurch.Where as their is on the same plot of land of the proposed TG/VG at Ashton Vale. Can i also say you come across,as a very interesting person.zzzzzzzzzzzzzz could i suggest you take up something exciting like knitting,maybe a new anorak.”

“I wish the Post would stop saying it is back to square one. It s not. The registration of the southern half of the site was not challenged. The inspector is only being asked to look at the northern part of the site that was not registered as a TGV.”