Rugby Club progress...

The truth the whole truth

Well-Known Forumite
Benefits I guess:

-Better sports facilities. When other are being closed in the area.
-more accessible central location
-social, community and health impacts
-better on sight parking as Kingsway will become double yellow for new western access.
-more money coming into area
-creation of jobs.

No benefits whatsoever that cannot be done on the current site
 

Gareth

Well-Known Forumite
Well parking is an issue on the current site as Kingsway can be a nightmare with parking on there. If its double yellow lined the only place to go would be King Horse, they won't want it.

there is very little room for bigger facilities or expansion they want about 4 pitches that won't happen on the current site, without it there is no increase in turnover nor employment. Location isnt bad but there is little in the way of bus routes. most buses stop at chell rd, a new site would be more accessible and easier to locate, let alone closer proximity to the western access means north and east side visitors could bypass the town route to gain access.

Not saying I agree but that is how planners will be thinking.
 

proactive

Enjoying a drop of red.
Well parking is an issue on the current site as Kingsway can be a nightmare with parking on there. If its double yellow lined the only place to go would be King Horse, they won't want it.

there is very little room for bigger facilities or expansion they want about 4 pitches that won't happen on the current site, without it there is no increase in turnover nor employment. Location isnt bad but there is little in the way of bus routes. most buses stop at chell rd, a new site would be more accessible and easier to locate, let alone closer proximity to the western access means north and east side visitors could bypass the town route to gain access.

Not saying I agree but that is how planners will be thinking.
They already have 4 pitches on the current site.
 

Gareth

Well-Known Forumite
They only have 2 and one has been sold. Let alone the site is ugly and bag of rip old crap to be fair.

My concern is the rubbish at doxey marshes. Loose rugby balls, plastic cups, wrappers, cans will be blown or thrown across the marshes. If one was to look at the treeline at the current club.... What a friggin mess!!

Will the fireworks display still occur, now that would intrusive on the local habitat.
 

The truth the whole truth

Well-Known Forumite
P
Well parking is an issue on the current site as Kingsway can be a nightmare with parking on there. If its double yellow lined the only place to go would be King Horse, they won't want it.

there is very little room for bigger facilities or expansion they want about 4 pitches that won't happen on the current site, without it there is no increase in turnover nor employment. Location isnt bad but there is little in the way of bus routes. most buses stop at chell rd, a new site would be more accessible and easier to locate, let alone closer proximity to the western access means north and east side visitors could bypass the town route to gain access.

Not saying I agree but that is how planners will be thinking.

So you build a road to alliviate then put in a facility to generate traffic slap bang in the middle , the estate has one way in and out , the estate is full of freeloaders 7 days a week then to add more users when the car parks are full or flooded on the new club site , parking on Kingsway should have never been allowed in the 1st place to accommodate the current site
 
Last edited:

proactive

Enjoying a drop of red.
They only have 2 and one has been sold. Let alone the site is ugly and bag of rip old crap to be fair.
They have four.

If they've been daft enough to allow the sale of one before they have somewhere else to go then that would be their problem. If they have.

I'm not aware of any serious efforts having been made to improve or decorate their existing premises so that too is their problem, surely.
 

The Hawk

Well-Known Forumite
There are more questions than answers:

According to the Rugby Football Union the minimum floodlight requirement for training and matches at levels 6 to 12 is a maintained illuminance of 100 lux and for matches at levels 1 to 5 its 200 lux. I understand that Stafford Rugby Club is somewhere around level 7 at the moment.

And yet Mark Alford's report states:
In terms of the pitch floodlights, an assessment has been submitted which shows that they would be a maximum of 50 lux

How will that work then?
 

tek-monkey

wanna see my snake?
There are more questions than answers:

According to the Rugby Football Union the minimum floodlight requirement for training and matches at levels 6 to 12 is a maintained illuminance of 100 lux and for matches at levels 1 to 5 its 200 lux. I understand that Stafford Rugby Club is somewhere around level 7 at the moment.

And yet Mark Alford's report states:


How will that work then?

Cos they'd change the bulbs once they get built, then put in retrospective planning permission if caught and claim ignorance. Although if the people I overheard on the marshes follow through the bulbs will need replacing almost daily anyway!
 

Gareth

Well-Known Forumite
Of course would create jobs and work PPppppp. The place has to be constructed from scratch. Where there is construction of any kind there are jobs created as many workers in such fields are essentially freelance and go where the work is. Even my 3 year old niece has enough sav to work that one out

the proposal is a bigger site so that will bring more work with it once it complete.

I base the sale comment related to the trainings pitches on kingsway opposite the rugby club. That was taken from someone else making the claim somewhere earlier in the thread.
 
Last edited:

kyoto49

Well-Known Forumite
Cos they'd change the bulbs once they get built, then put in retrospective planning permission if caught and claim ignorance. Although if the people I overheard on the marshes follow through the bulbs will need replacing almost daily anyway!

:D
 

PPPPPP

Well-Known Forumite
Of course would create jobs and work PPppppp. The place has to be constructed from scratch. Where there is construction of any kind there are jobs created as many workers in such fields are essentially freelance and go where the work is. Even my 3 year old niece has enough sav to work that one out

the proposal is a bigger site so that will bring more work with it once it complete.

I base the sale comment related to the trainings pitches on kingsway opposite the rugby club. That was taken from someone else making the claim somewhere earlier in the thread.

Sorry to disappoint your 3 year-old niece, but after the site has been flattened probably only a few part-time bar staff and and someone to count the money. As an alternative, they could create work by rebuilding the current pitches at a lower height so they'd flood in winter. A giant wind machine on the west of the site might keep a few more people busy, too.
 

Withnail

Well-Known Forumite
New document. SBC now duping DCLG, apparently. Funny how it took a week to post this on the site.






From: Karen Partridge Sent: 17 March 2016 12:04 To: 'malford@staffordbc.gov.uk'; 'rwood@staffordbc.gov.uk' Subject: Stafford Rugby Club on Land at Blackberry Lane. Ref No: 16/23583/FUL

Mark We spoke this morning and you kindly brought me up to date with the position of this application. And I note you are on AL until 4/4/16 after Friday, hence I’m cc’ing Richard in. I understand you are taking it to Committee on Wed 30 March. As I explained, the Secretary of State has a letter requesting ‘call in’ of this application. I will be sending a holding reply to the writer, advising that we will be taking no action until such times as this application has been to committee. In general, we consider that it is inappropriate in these cases to consider whether intervention at Government level is appropriate until the Council has reached a clear recommendation, taking into account the views expressed by consultees and the local community. In the event that your Council is minded to approve the application, following committee, we will then consider the request along with any other issues raised by the application against the call-in policy set out in the Ministerial Statement of 26 October 2012. We would then need a period of time to assess this request, post committee. You mentioned that there is no S106 on this application, so it is likely that you could be in a position to issue the planning permission quite quickly. We may therefore, depending on the outcome at committee, need to issue an Article 31 (previously 25) Holding Direction, to you on Thursday 31 March, formally preventing your authority from issuing planning permission. Or we could agree an informal arrangement. We agreed I would keep in contact with Richard in your absence and I will call him on the am of 31/3 to establish the outcome of the Committee. I hope this is clear. Please don’t hesitate to contact me with any queries in the meantime.

Regards Karen Karen Partridge | Planning Casework Manager - Central Team| National Planning Casework Unit | Department for Communities and Local Government | 0303 444 8030 | karen.partridge@communities.gsi.gov.uk | 5 St Philip's Place, Birmingham B3 2PW | NPCU general enquiries | 0303 444 8050 | npcu@communities.gsi.gov.uk | Visit DCLG on GOV.UK www.gov.uk/dclg | Follow us on Twitter: @CommunitiesUK **
UX2frFR.gif
 
Top