Sport and Politics

[Gareth]

There is a lack of footy pitches in stafford as in all areas, quality ones anyway. However if riverway is privately owned then surely they can do what they like.

However swings and roundabouts, council may not want this on riverway same as public do not want a golf course extension because developers cannot follow some stupid red tape rules.

concrete over it all and have it done with, lack of leisure across the borough and everyone is culpable

 

[Chick]

There is a lack of footy pitches in stafford as in all areas, quality ones anyway. However if riverway is privately owned then surely they can do what they like.

However swings and roundabouts, council may not want this on riverway same as public do not want a golf course extension because developers cannot follow some stupid red tape rules.

concrete over it all and have it done with, lack of leisure across the borough and everyone is culpable

It would be extremely hypocritical of the council to use the "don't want it on Riverway" argument when they've given such public support to Stafford Town FC's recent announcement that they plan to change their pitch to an astro, which is also receiving council funding...but of course that's football...

 

[proactive]

There is a lack of footy pitches in stafford as in all areas, quality ones anyway. However if riverway is privately owned then surely they can do what they like.

However swings and roundabouts, council may not want this on riverway same as public do not want a golf course extension because developers cannot follow some stupid red tape rules.

concrete over it all and have it done with, lack of leisure across the borough and everyone is culpable

Give me an A
Give me an R
Give me an S
Give me an ...

 

[ATJ]

There is a lack of footy pitches in stafford as in all areas, quality ones anyway. However if riverway is privately owned then surely they can do what they like.

However swings and roundabouts, council may not want this on riverway same as public do not want a golf course extension because developers cannot follow some stupid red tape rules.

concrete over it all and have it done with, lack of leisure across the borough and everyone is culpable

That's a bit disingenuous Gareth. My impression is that the public have no objection to a golf course extension. Their objection is to the stench of human shit coming off it. The majority of people would prefer to see the golf course completed, but they'd like to see the developer act responsibly too.

Anyway, this is the borough council who shut down the tennis and bowls courts at Littleworth, gating them off with locks and signs telling the public to stay away. Not a great record.

 

[Withnail]

That's a bit disingenuous Gareth.

That's a bit generous ATJ...

 

[John Marwood]

"What's the Frequency, Kenneth?..

 

[Gareth]

Well bowls greens and tennis court are shut because people do not use leisure facilities in stafford and if such items do not at least break even the local taxpayer pays for it to stay open, do not think that's right.

maybe if people got out more instead as john states stafford people wouldn't be getting bigger. To add the planning department rarely know arse from elbow bar ticking boxes for extensions to the concrete jungle. Stafford apparently is the only planning dept in the county without a sound tree policy or ensure that landscaping matters are completed by developers. Stafford will soon be a grey greenless concrete wasteland with nothing to do

 

[proactive]

Well bowls greens and tennis court are shut because people do not use leisure facilities in stafford and if such items do not at least break even the local taxpayer pays for it to stay open, do not think that's right.

maybe if people got out more instead as john states stafford people wouldn't be getting bigger. To add the planning department rarely know arse from elbow bar ticking boxes for extensions to the concrete jungle. Stafford apparently is the only planning dept in the county without a sound tree policy or ensure that landscaping matters are completed by developers. Stafford will soon be a grey greenless concrete wasteland with nothing to do

It's going to be a private pitch on private land, nothing to do with the taxpayer. Do at least try to understand the issue before giving us the benefit of your wisdom.

 

[ATJ]

Well bowls greens and tennis court are shut because people do not use leisure facilities in stafford and if such items do not at least break even the local taxpayer pays for it to stay open, do not think that's right.

maybe if people got out more instead as john states stafford people wouldn't be getting bigger. To add the planning department rarely know arse from elbow bar ticking boxes for extensions to the concrete jungle. Stafford apparently is the only planning dept in the county without a sound tree policy or ensure that landscaping matters are completed by developers. Stafford will soon be a grey greenless concrete wasteland with nothing to do

You're wrong. The facilities at littleworth were free to use. They were closed because SBC decided they couldn't afford the maintenance. There was a campaign to allow local volunteers to maintain it but SBC didn't want that.
Of course it is right for local authorities to maintain public space at cost to the taxpayer. Thats what local authorities are for.

 

[Ninja0239]

Has anyone had oppportunity to read the Playing Pitch Strategy 2009 produced for the Borough Council. The document is quite wordy (and a little repetitive) so below I have cut and paste the comments made on the ATP Provision Objectives

"The council should adopt the follolwing objectives for ATP Provision:
- To protect the current pattern of ATP's from development
- To work with the county council to develop new ATP's on at least 4 of the towns Stafford secondary schools, or alternatively, to work with the University to develop an additional ATP at Beaconside
- To identify and allocate sites for potential ATP's"

From what I can gather since the report was produced in 2009, Stafford is at risk of losing 2 of its ATP's at Beaconside, if Stafford BC can not find a partner to enter into a joint user agreement with them. A poster on here as indicated that one of the reasons for this new pitch is the risk now placed over these ATP pitches at Beaconside.

Four new ATP's are required? I am aware that the BC has built a new one at Rowley Park (for football) and has plans to build a second on the Stafford Town FC site (also for Football). Despite the report stating that there is adequate pitch provision for Football, but there was a need for mini pitches for junior teams.

The only reasons that I can see for the BC not wanting this ATP pitch for hockey would because they are either worried about the loss of revenue at Beaconside if Stafford HC decide to use this pitch over theres and/or they are certain that the Beaconside pitches will be saved and therefore there is not a need for more hockey provision. - Both of these arguments can be easily contested.

Phoenix ladies Hockey team are currently forced to play their games in Cannock and Stafford HC are forced to play some of their home games outside of the town - so there is certainly a need for an additional pitch or pitches depending on the future of Beaconside. The Playing pitch strategy report states that "both mens and womens hockey are significantly more popular in the Borough than in England as a whole" - Page 28

So what posssible reasons have the BC got to refuse!!

 

[Chick]

Your guess is as good as mine!

To support the number of teams currently playing hockey, Stafford Cricket & Hockey club ideally need the use of 2 astro pitches. With 11 teams playing on a Saturday it would be expected that 5-6 teams on average will be playing at home but this varies week by week. Due to the time slots arrangements needed to fit matches in within the league windows, only 5 matches can be played on a Saturday. At Beaconside these slots are 10am (earliest possible start time) 11:30am 1pm, 2:30pm and 4pm (latest possible start time).

It is not currently possible to use the 4pm slot at Beaconside as the floodlights are in such a state of disrepair that it's unsafe to play a competitive match. One corner of the pitch is effectively in darkness.

So that leaves 4 available slots with possibly 6 teams needing to play at home and depending on fixtures there is often a requirement for more home slots

As the club continues to grow I can only see the number of teams increasing rather than decreasing and if you factor in other clubs like Phoenix returning to playing in Stafford then there is definitely scope to make use of 2 astro pitches all day on a Saturday

Mid week training might be the only revenue loss for Beaconside as if they had their own pitch I would expect Stafford to use that rather then Beaconside but there is no reason why Beaconside couldn't be used for football on those nights as it is on other evenings

Traffic, noise and light pollution are usually the 3 main considerations when making planning decisions.

There would be no extra traffic to the Riverway site on a Saturday (the busiest time) as a result of the new pitch as all teams currently use the facility for after game refreshments. The only additional traffic would be during the week if schools made use of it and evening training.

There would be a negligible increase in noise (if any) as this would be in line with the noise levels of the rugby currently being played.

The developers have responded on queries over the floodlights and a precedent has already been set with the Stafford Town FC development.

 

[Rikki]

If you were to measure from where the proposed site is I don't think anyone would be closer than we are. Or more precisely our living room and bedroom above it.

Personally I don't think the noise and lights are an issue. I can never hear anything in the house from the current facilities and don't expect that to change. Even though I suspect the hockey pitch would be a lot busier than Stafford town.

We actually like being able to hear and see all the activities that go on in the summer when out in the garden or the rear windows and doors are open.

 

[shoes]

We actually like being able to hear and see all the activities that go on in the summer when out in the garden or the rear windows and doors are open.

I've been campaigning for a women's volleyball court at the back of our place for years...

 

[SCHC]

For obvious reasons (i.e. profile pic) I've been keeping a close eye on this application. The opposition views being put forward by some of the governing bodies/council are just baffling to anyone with an ounce of common sense

Sadly, they are far from baffling if you begin to understand the motives and agendas of the people involved with trying to prevent this development from happening.

 

[SCHC]

Can you summarise, there are hell of a lot of related documents.

Money and protection thereof

 

[SCHC]

As far as I know not a single objection has been made by a member of the public.

Correct

 

[SCHC]

The latest documents say it all really. Council (or rather leisure department) want planning to be turned down, issue documents saying as much and giving their reasons. But want the fact they have done so kept secret.

If the reasons were valid what reason could there be for not making it public knowledge? Like it has been now as it seems someone was trying to hide what should have always been in the public domain.

Secret document, yes folks you heard it correct, documents classified as secret by people that work for and are paid for by YOU!

 

[SCHC]

Dear lord. I despair.

Your avatar sums up are feelings perfectly

 

[SCHC]

If you (the club) own the land then I really cannot see why anyone would have any grounds to object. The fact that it's not going to be for football is, surely, every reason to go ahead with it, so that people can have a choice as to what to play rather than having to follow the sheep.

Strangely enough, that's what we thought, albeit we did warn our agent and construction partner that dark forces would derail the process (have we mentioned secret documents?)

 

[SCHC]

Love the 'cash cow' comment - rather reeks of 'who smelt it dealt it' don't it?

Worried about their own 'cash cow' and seeking to protect its buttery teat?

Nailed it! That comment (for anyone who has not read the documents) comes directly from YOUR council, as part of a document to convince an INDEPENDANT (sic) body to ratify and support the supply and construction of artificial grass pitches in Stafford Borough. As they say....follow the money....