Rugby Club progress...

John Marwood

I ♥ cryptic crosswords
It had occurred to me that not everyone will have visited Doxey Marshes and may not know the best routes to see them

Apart from entering along the old railway line on Doxey Road you can also gain access by way of Warren's Lane which is opposite Tillington Hall Hotel, a track that runs alongside a Dental Practice

There is also a car park off Wootton Drive off the Eccleshall Road.
Wellies are a good idea in Winter but walking boots may suffice if there has not been too much rain
There are 2 hides from which to view from and if dry you can walk from the motorway all the way along the Marshes to The Railway Inn for a reward
 

Gramaisc

Forum O. G.
It had occurred to me that not everyone will have visited Doxey Marshes and may not know the best routes to see them

Apart from entering along the old railway line on Doxey Road you can also gain access by way of Warren's Lane which is opposite Tillington Hall Hotel, a track that runs alongside a Dental Practice

There is also a car park off Wootton Drive off the Eccleshall Road.
Wellies are a good idea in Winter but walking boots may suffice if there has not been too much rain
There are 2 hides from which to view from and if dry you can walk from the motorway all the way along the Marshes to The Railway Inn for a reward
If tired, you may be able to sit on benches that I put in at the end of the last century - if they're still there....
 

Sir BoD

Well-Known Forumite
Whilst I understand the sensitivity of the area to wildlife, I'm wondering whether Mr Drone man would be able to get some aerial footage of the area - Just so our children's grandchildren can see how lovely it was before their lovely Marshview Housing Estate was built (on stilts) - complete with a complimentary 4sq ft of grassland for the public and wildlife to enjoy.
 

proactive

Enjoying a drop of red.
complete with a complimentary 4sq ft of grassland for the public and wildlife to enjoy.
Now you're just being silly!

Not all of the 4sq ft will be designated for wildlife. Some of it is grassland that just happens to border the designated area. The wildlife know that and, because they are sensible, know to avoid it. Therefore any reasonable right-minded person knows that only really 1sq ft is designated for protection, leaving the other 3sq ft for something really important, like perhaps an extra toilet for the good Lord Stafford to shit in.
 

John Marwood

I ♥ cryptic crosswords
Whilst I understand the sensitivity of the area to wildlife, I'm wondering whether Mr Drone man would be able to get some aerial footage of the area - Just so our children's grandchildren can see how lovely it was before their lovely Marshview Housing Estate was built (on stilts) - complete with a complimentary 4sq ft of grassland for the public and wildlife to enjoy.

Bob Dylan?
 

PPPPPP

Well-Known Forumite
It really cheers me up to hear that not all of them are on the take, Gareth. What percentage of corruption do you consider acceptable in local government? As it happens, I'm from a rugby-mad family who would have been thrilled to see Stafford's facilities improved, but not if it involved dodgy planners, other vested interests and the loss of something that's far more important to everyone else, now and in the future.
 

tek-monkey

wanna see my snake?
Now on a PC, much easier to quote, so I'll address a few earlier points again.

I guess it is true to say that any time you build anything you take space that something uses. All suggestions to move to a greenfield site elsewhere are equally going to have the effect of building on something.

What about beaconside? That is already sports pitches, the disruption to change it to sports pitches would be minimal.

I have seen suggestions to build new changing rooms and additional parking at the current site to have 2 sets of buildings. These would have to go on an area which is currently hedges and adjacent to a well used water culvert. Parking would be still across a road which has already seen at least one child struck by a car.

But less new land is used, thats the key point. The children hit by cars feels like clutching at straws TBH, kids have been run over on car parks and driveways too. Still, could build a foot bridge if too concerned?

Or go out of town by miles as some suggest and generate thousands of additional car journeys, increased potential for accidents and reduced ability to access by cycling or public transport.

As stated earlier, only for those south of the town centre. Beaconside just got a cycle bridge almost right to it meaning anyone East of the town centre is very well catered for. Buses already run to the hospital, its not much further. They also already have parking for those unable to cope otherwise.

Others suggest using other facilities in town - there is no capacity anywhere on additional facilities and national planning does not allow reductions in playing fields so new ones need to be built anyway.

If national planning does not allow a reduction in playing fields can we not keep beaconside? Or is losing that being balanced by the 7 pitches the rugby club are building and the beaconside facilities will end up as housing? Not seen the in town bit mentioned and no idea where they mean TBH, there is some ideal land in a field at the cricket club but you aren't allowed new pitches on there because it will make the area look bad.

I am not suggesting this is not a complex issue but it is not as one dimensional as some seem to suggest. A key priority must be surely to provide accessible quality sporting and community facilities that support participation in Sport for youngsters, in a location that is in a safe and accessible

Have I mentioned Beaconside? Currently quite happily used by loads of people and about to be scrapped, a loss to the whole town. What if there was some way we could have not just rugby pitches but a large multi discipline sports facility for the entire town to use, including the youngsters? The site seems relatively safe and certainly more accessible than the marshes. which will require everyone to enter via doxey road which is about to get much busier with the Western Bypass from Lidl and joining up to Castlefields further up.

I know you say this isn't a one dimensional issue but until I hear a better reason than boosting Lord Staffords profits Beaconside will remain the obvious choice to me. What is really galling is it used to belong to us, the tax payers. How the Uni was allowed to sell it in the first place is beyond me! Although it doesn't surprise me.
 

John Marwood

I ♥ cryptic crosswords
It had occurred to me that not everyone will have visited Doxey Marshes and may not know the best routes to see them

Apart from entering along the old railway line on Doxey Road you can also gain access by way of Warren's Lane which is opposite Tillington Hall Hotel, a track that runs alongside a Dental Practice

There is also a car park off Wootton Drive off the Eccleshall Road.
Wellies are a good idea in Winter but walking boots may suffice if there has not been too much rain
There are 2 hides from which to view from and if dry you can walk from the motorway all the way along the Marshes to The Railway Inn for a reward

I deliberately avoided mentioning Littleme's secret entrance to the Marshes via Stafford Common

Because it's a secret
 

littleme

250,000th poster!
I deliberately avoided mentioning Littleme's secret entrance to the Marshes via Stafford Common

Because it's a secret
Shhhhhh, don't tell em all my secrets!

You can park on the old Homebase (Dunelm, Dreams, Farmfoods) car park & cut through down the side of the Health Centre/cemetery if you need to drive to get there....

Conveniently* there are toilets situated in both Homebase & Dunelm if you have little ones that may need to 'go' before a walk.

*Did you see what I did there...
 

Withnail

Well-Known Forumite
OK, so in your first para you agree with everything I said, but you still think it's pathetic to have a harmless dig at someone who suddenly pops up here making blinkered comments in favour of the council and rugby club? (Regards to MAL.)
With all due respect to the anonymity thread, i think it is quite obvious where M(a)L is coming from - Imagine the M is a J - i don't think he speaks for the Council.

I'm going to say some other things but i currently need both a wee and a cigarette.
 

Withnail

Well-Known Forumite
I am sure nothing I say will be greeted as accurate - however let me try.

I was stating earlier that the site is NOT on the nature reserve as others had indicated; debates and discussions on the precise nature of boundaries and where and when migratory birds cross them is indeed an interesting discussion. I was simply trying to start the discussion from a basis of actual fact. There are houses bordering the Nature reserve and car parks and play area - all closer than this site. I am sure there is plenty of detail on the use by wading birds etc. near these developments.

The chat about floodlights is interesting as the light spill shows that there is no light spill from floodlights onto the nature reserve - this has been agreed by Natural England. For those who do not know who NE are I took this from their website "We're the government’s adviser for the natural environment in England, helping to protect England’s nature and landscapes for people to enjoy and for the services they provide." So I ask you to accept the opinion of the national body responsible for these things - this seems reasonable to me.

A review of the plans shows that the development will create a new wetland area at the end of the site. This provides enhanced environment for waders etc. actually increasing the area of wetland for the species that use the area. This is of course outside the Nature Reserve. The proposed site is not wetland. You do not tend to find wetland migratory birds in the middle of dry grassland.
I refer the right honourable Member to the first rebuttal here, but seeing as we are a few pages along from that i would like to present mine...
There are houses bordering the Nature reserve and car parks and play area...
Now for starters, stating that there are preexisting 'pressures' is not a great argument for adding to them - you might as well say that, seeing that you have already stolen one of my biscuits, it hardly matters if you steal a second. TBF i ought to keep my powder dry, but seeing as you brought this up first, and it is the most ridiculous of your arguments, it must be dealt with first.

MAL said:
So I ask you to accept the opinion of the national body responsible for these things - this seems reasonable to me.
At this point i shall give the floor to Mr. tek-monkey -
As the planners are ignoring completely the local wildlife trust they are in fact directly going against Natural England's position, to use them as backup is as hilarious as it is obvious they couldn't give a monkeys.
Does it still seem reasonable to you?

MAL said:
The proposed site is not wetland. You do not tend to find wetland migratory birds in the middle of dry grassland.
Flippancy in the face of determined and knowledgeable opposition would be acceptable if it was backed by the same, or indeed greater, knowledge base. In this case it is not. I fear you must accept that you are out of your element.

I trust that what we can all accept is this -
The Hawk said:
Just to restate my, and others, position. I fully support the development of improved facilities for the rugby club, just not in this location.
- we wish you no ill, we just don't want you to maul our marsh.

Have a look through this thread if you genuinely give...

We all know who the villain of the piece is.
 

The truth the whole truth

Well-Known Forumite
Have I mentioned Beaconside? Currently quite happily used by loads of people and about to be scrapped, a loss to the whole town. What if there was some way we could have not just rugby pitches but a large multi discipline sports facility for the entire town to use, including the youngsters? The site seems relatively safe and certainly more accessible than the marshes. which will require everyone to enter via doxey road which is about to get much busier with the Western Bypass from Lidl and joining up to Castlefields further up.


Seems to me planners don't see the obvious , very blinkered or even knobbled to see it .
 
Top