Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
Seems the public via social media do not share that view. Yes to the development, but it should have been built in the north of the town.
Perhaps the local land owners who objected to the development wanted to off load there assets?Where? How? The Sheridan Centre?
Building the Riverside Development in the north end of town would have involved acquiring 3rd party properties and redeveloping the whole area. Whilst I'd support this, it was never going to happen given that there was large, derelict site to the south of the town.
I'm very glad we have the riverside development. Hopefully, the morons managing the Guildhall will now finally address it's decline.
Errrr... it wasn't a large derelict site until it was turned into one. The area housed a leisure Centre that had more facilities than the one that replaced it, a supermarket in relatively new buildings and a mult-storey car park very similar to the one that replaced it. There was no need to knock any of it down.Where? How? The Sheridan Centre?
Building the Riverside Development in the north end of town would have involved acquiring 3rd party properties and redeveloping the whole area. Whilst I'd support this, it was never going to happen given that there was large, derelict site to the south of the town.
I'm very glad we have the riverside development. Hopefully, the morons managing the Guildhall will now finally address it's decline.
There's plenty of free land available on Chell Road. The outside lane signposted Telford seems to be an unpopular parcel of land that certain people don't think anyone should use.Where? How? The Sheridan Centre?
Building the Riverside Development in the north end of town would have involved acquiring 3rd party properties and redeveloping the whole area. Whilst I'd support this, it was never going to happen given that there was large, derelict site to the south of the town.
I'm very glad we have the riverside development. Hopefully, the morons managing the Guildhall will now finally address it's decline.
Errrr... it wasn't a large derelict site until it was turned into one. The area housed a leisure Centre that had more facilities than the one that replaced it, a supermarket in relatively new buildings and a mult-storey car park very similar to the one that replaced it. There was no need to knock any of it down.
So, as I said, they replaced the ugly leisure Centre with another ugly leisure Centre but with many fewer facilities, they replaced a large council-owned car park with another council-owned car park. They replaced a large empty supermarket with an even larger empty supermarket.The former site comprised of a council owned leisure centre that was ugly and a large council owned car park. It's a lot easier to redevelop an area when you own the asset that you are wanting to develop. The new leisure centre is far better than the one it replaced and the riverside complex is far more attractive than what it replaced.
So, as I said, they replaced the ugly leisure Centre with another ugly leisure Centre but with many fewer facilities, they replaced a large council-owned car park with another council-owned car park. They replaced a large empty supermarket with an even larger empty supermarket.
The riverside complex would have been just as attractive, if that is what you think it is, wherever it was built. Had it been built on the council-owned site on which the supermarket-that-never-was was built then Stafford would have had exactly the same facilities as it does now, at considerably less cost, and without the creation of a wasteland at the northern end of the former shopping area.
But that would have required some planning, and Stafford council has a policy of not planning anything, as we all know to our cost.
The former site comprised of a council owned leisure centre that was ugly and a large council owned car park. It's a lot easier to redevelop an area when you own the asset that you are wanting to develop. The new leisure centre is far better than the one it replaced and the riverside complex is far more attractive than what it replaced.
Gabor?Zzz Zzz.....
There was a multi-storey carpark, of a similar size (which was miraculously found to be unsafe), a Tesco store about the same size as the current Tesco, and a sports centre that was built around 1976.Maybe I haven't been in Stafford long enough, but I always knew the location of the development to be a derelict bunch of tarmac, an old grey car park looking structure and a bridge over the river, and that was it.
Was there something else there before? I never really even paid it any attention (maybe that was the problem?)
To be fair it suffered quite badly from urine corrosion.There was a multi-storey carpark, of a similar size (which was miraculously found to be unsafe), a Tesco store about the same size as the current Tesco, and a sports centre that was built around 1976.
And the new location is worse as well.Behave The old leisure centre was far bigger, and had it been maintained and updated correctly it would still be an asset to the town. It had both a large pool AND a diving pool, it had more squash courts, more sports halls, space for table tennis on the upstairs corridors etc etc. Back in the day kids would spend their whole summer holidays doing sport at the Riverside for 4 hours a day. No kid does sport at the new place in the holidays anymore because it's just a glorified adult gym with a pool that any peado can sit over the road to view. At a time when Stafford is multiplying in size, the council decided to make a fast buck and lumber the people of Stafford with a facility half the size of the centre that was built 40 years earlier when the population was significantly smaller. It might have been shiny and new, but it's to sports facilites what the guildhall is to shopping.............sh*t!
There was a multi-storey carpark, of a similar size (which was miraculously found to be unsafe), a Tesco store about the same size as the current Tesco, and a sports centre that was built around 1976.
It feels a bit odd when you see buildings that you saw built being demolished...
And the new location is worse as well.
I used to work for County Treasurers and reckon I must have played around 1000 5-a-side games in the old Riverside, due in part because it was convenient to play during lunch hours and after work. When the new one opened, our 5-a-side squad folded as did others.