Rugby Club progress...

A

alphagamma

Well-Known Forumite
Don't see how those three points could be reasons for granting planning permission, especially the first! The council has demonstrated a sufficient housing supply. Doxey Marsh only has one thing going for it (a cosy deal with his lordship). In most respects it's worse than the present site.
 
M

markpa12003

Well-Known Forumite
The site was allocated in a local plan. It is because sbc has an adopted local plan that it is able to demonstrate an adequate supply of housing.
 
R

Ron

A few posts under my belt
alphagamma said:
Don't see how those three points could be reasons for granting planning permission, especially the first! The council has demonstrated a sufficient housing supply. Doxey Marsh only has one thing going for it (a cosy deal with his lordship). In most respects it's worse than the present site.
Click to expand...

Alphagamma can I ask that (and I am assuming here so apologies) but given that you probably aren't a member of the rugby club nor do you work in planning or probably for a company that designs sports clubs layouts, why are you so sure the new rugby club site is worse than the last one?
 
Mikinton

Mikinton

Well-Known Forumite
Ron said:
The new site is above the 100 year flood level. Next
Click to expand...
... but is it at greater risk of flooding than the current pitches?

And will the playing surface be no worse though September to April? (Or are you planning on going 3G?)
 
Last edited:
R

Ron

A few posts under my belt
Mikinton said:
... but is it at greater risk of flooding than the current pitches?

And will the playing surface be no worse though September to April? (Or are you planning on going 3G?)
Click to expand...

I know the club have had at least one full weekend of games cancelled so far this winter and midweek training having to be moved due other sites on occasion. Current back pitches don't drain particularly well due to drain ditch alongside them

Jonah said:
And we all know that record flood levels are NEVER broken... :roll:
Click to expand...

Quite, but a 1 in 100 year risk is worth it no?
 
proactive

proactive

Enjoying a drop of red.
Admin said:
No, because that would be very confusing given that they are entirely different people.

Will I be changing your username to PPPPPP?
Click to expand...
Like it.
xkt3v.gif
 
Kopite76

Kopite76

Well-Known Forumite
Ron said:
I know the club have had at least one full weekend of games cancelled so far this winter and midweek training having to be moved due other sites on occasion. Current back pitches don't drain particularly well due to drain ditch alongside them



Quite, but a 1 in 100 year risk is worth it no?
Click to expand...

I walk these fields everyday with my dogs and I can safely say the pitches won't flood when built. Hope it takes ages to be built as my dogs love it over there
 
proactive

proactive

Enjoying a drop of red.
Jonah said:
It only takes 1 flood to destroy a building and sports pitches.
Click to expand...
Maybe, if the location prevents them getting affordable flood insurance, we will all be bailing them out by paying more from our own premiums to the Idiots Who Move To Known Flooding Areas And Can't Afford The Premiums Fund there seems to be nowadays.
 
Mikinton

Mikinton

Well-Known Forumite
The Hawk said:
3G might not be the way to go at the moment, due to some serious potential health concerns regarding the rubber crumb used in them.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football...being-ripped-up-in-holland-over-health-fears/
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know. It seems it might be a problem especially for goalkeepers.

ETA I've spent over 3 hours on each of the last 4 weekends stood on 3G pitches; 3 times at Birmingham Uni's and once at Swansea Uni's.

ETAA We're at Bath this weekend - a grass pitch, though apparently it was a mud-bath last weekend. Glad I'm only stood on the sideline.
 
Last edited:
R

Ron

A few posts under my belt
You're citing a 6 month old article which actually states that the Dutch ignored the regulations around the use of rubber crumb and offers no scientific evidence.
Given that the technology of 3G pitches has come along way and the fact that the Dutch FA chose not apply to standard and that Premiership rugby clubs are now playing games on these pitches, I really fail to see what your point is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top