I've been following this from afar.... One of the reasons for the rejection was the loss of a grass pitch...
Whose decision was it to stop using one of the football patched there this season (one half of the cricket pitch with the artificial strip?)
Agreed.. and to clarify (ie. bore everyone again)
The land and pitches are owned by Stafford
Cricket & Hockey Club and has been since 1984. We are not a football or rugby club
When the club moved to Riverway in 1984 competitive Hockey was played on grass. Since circa late 80's competitive hockey has to be played on artificial surfaces.
This freed up space and SCHC accommodated football in the winter months
In 2005, St Leonards RUFC were evicted from their pitch by SBC when they obtained Alstom's land. Our club offered the rugby club the use of a pitch, the changing rooms and the bar. This has been a mutually beneficial arrangement. Albeit one that the rugby club admitted was "a temporary fix" back in 2005/6.
Since the late 80's the hockey section of our club has wanted to play their games at home at Riverway and wished to build an artificial pitch. Eventually, the money has been raised (approx7K) to make the designs and plans etc JUST to TRY and obtain a permission to proceed.
As part of the overall plan, the cricket artificial and proposed grass square has to move to the west (ie onto where the football pitch is) Therefore, to answer your first question, the management committee and the cricket committee agreed that for two reasons -
1. Wear and tear on the football area that meant fielding on the cricket ground was unsafe until the end of May
2. A plan to construct the new artificial and/or grass square during winter 2015/16 (ready for cricket season 2016) based on a planning permission that was due no later than last spring (if that all makes sense) Therefore the football could not be guaranteed a pitch for the whole of 15/16
In terms of the loss of grass pitch - we are not building a Tesco - we are changing real grass to artificial grass. In I guess, to think of a close example, aha, the same way STFC have just got permission to change their real grass pitch to a artificial pitch. (without objection from their landlords - Stafford Borough Council)
And of course, the Rugby club have use of a pitch on Riverway owned by Stafford College (and furthermore a promise from SCHC to give them use of our bar and changing facilities in the winter)
With planning being refused and Beaconside closing, Stafford will now lose a cricket club, a hockey club and a rugby club
And we repeat again - we are a cricket and hockey club who wish to play cricket and hockey. Are we saying that it is also our responsibility to ensure football and rugby can be serviced too?