Re: Being aware. : Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:43 pm  

Fishermanscap wrote:

I think some of you are missing the point here. This access issue is a red herring and you need to think outside the box to use that awful expression.

It works like this IMO, you don't need easy access for cars to the actual ground just to the city centre. The city centre is your car park, it seems very logical to me.

Why do some people suddenly feel that 3000 cars need to parked right next to the ground? They can't do that at BV and never would be able to yet we all seem to think BV is ok. Ditto NM which is out on a limb for most and is poorly serviced by public transport whilst I suspect there will be nowhere near enough car parking spaces provided near the site. Thornes was not that different to Balne lane in that you wouldn't have been able to park next to the stadium.

The walk from the Northgate area is not that much more of a walk than some of us make to get to BV but a hell of a lot nicer. Also because it's in virtually in the town centre then virtually every bus in WMDC terminates within 15 minutes of the place. For once it actually makes public transport look the best option which has to be a plus these days.

In it's own way it's quite cutting edge and hugely accessible to those who don't drive or can't because they fancy a drink, it is quite honestly the definition of a community stadium. Stadiums like this are the norm in France where car parking is non existent.

Finally I don't get this flooding bit some are talking about, I believe the ability to build storm drains etc has existed for decades maybe longer

It's not ideal but what is. However I don't see the point in getting hung up on the detail when for now it's little more than a rumour.

OK Rodders, back in the days of Franchisin, BV was marked down for lack of parking facilities and one thing the area surrounding our current ground does have is plenty of street parking.
Similarly, although the current residents would not be chuffed about it, Thornes is surrounded by street parking AND has reasonable car parking.
Balne Lane fields have zero access and altough visiting fans could try their luck on tThe Peacock Estate and Blackthorn Way etc, there is nowhere near enough parking in the surrounding area.
I know that in your Utopian world of public transport use, there ARE some advantages but, come on.

I made a comparison to The AJ Bell stadium in my previous post, which you dont appear to acknowledge, maybe you've not been there but, you seem to be in denial about the need for parking, which, was totally missing form the "build a stadium regardless of whether Trinity want to play there" scheme. But, even with excellent public transport links and close proximity to the town centre (which is ok walking to the game but, pretty tough going back into town), there would still need to be substantial parking and that assumes that there is actually room for a 10/12,000 capacity stadium.

If there are difficulties getting to and from ANY ground that may be built, the project is doomed to fail and on the subject of parking, what do you think other clubs have or, are they all wrong but, you are right ? I dont think so.

Also, do you think that sponsors, players, coaching staff etc should walk form the centre of town

Re: Being aware. : Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:43 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

OK Rodders, back in the days of Franchisin, BV was marked down for lack of parking facilities and one thing the area surrounding our current ground does have is plenty of street parking.
Similarly, although the current residents would not be chuffed about it, Thornes is surrounded by street parking AND has reasonable car parking.
Balne Lane fields have zero access and altough visiting fans could try their luck on tThe Peacock Estate and Blackthorn Way etc, there is nowhere near enough parking in the surrounding area.
I know that in your Utopian world of public transport use, there ARE some advantages but, come on.

I made a comparison to The AJ Bell stadium in my previous post, which you dont appear to acknowledge, maybe you've not been there but, you seem to be in denial about the need for parking, which, was totally missing form the "build a stadium regardless of whether Trinity want to play there" scheme. But, even with excellent public transport links and close proximity to the town centre (which is ok walking to the game but, pretty tough going back into town), there would still need to be substantial parking and that assumes that there is actually room for a 10/12,000 capacity stadium.

If there are difficulties getting to and from ANY ground that may be built, the project is doomed to fail and on the subject of parking, what do you think other clubs have or, are they all wrong but, you are right ? I dont think so.

Also, do you think that sponsors, players, coaching staff etc should walk form the centre of town

Or the disabled !!!!

Re: Being aware. : Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:48 pm  

There is an argument that the provision of parking at the AJ Bell is its weak point. You can get parked. You just can't get away, as the roads can't cope.

Warrington and Headingly don't have much parking, and the parking at Saints is probably retail parking in reality. I actually think the problem will be pedestrian access, as the pavements aren't wide and the ground would be completely surrounded by houses; As in, right up to the fences. What do they do: funnel them down a ginnel?

As has been said, it has served its purpose by being raised as a delaying factor, until it is overruled next year.

Re: Being aware. : Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:02 pm  

Fishermanscap wrote:

I think some of you are missing the point here. This access issue is a red herring and you need to think outside the box to use that awful expression.

It works like this IMO, you don't need easy access for cars to the actual ground just to the city centre. The city centre is your car park, it seems very logical to me.

Why do some people suddenly feel that 3000 cars need to parked right next to the ground? They can't do that at BV and never would be able to yet we all seem to think BV is ok. Ditto NM which is out on a limb for most and is poorly serviced by public transport whilst I suspect there will be nowhere near enough car parking spaces provided near the site. Thornes was not that different to Balne lane in that you wouldn't have been able to park next to the stadium.

The walk from the Northgate area is not that much more of a walk than some of us make to get to BV but a hell of a lot nicer. Also because it's in virtually in the town centre then virtually every bus in WMDC terminates within 15 minutes of the place. For once it actually makes public transport look the best option which has to be a plus these days.

In it's own way it's quite cutting edge and hugely accessible to those who don't drive or can't because they fancy a drink, it is quite honestly the definition of a community stadium. Stadiums like this are the norm in France where car parking is non existent.

Finally I don't get this flooding bit some are talking about, I believe the ability to build storm drains etc has existed for decades maybe longer

It's not ideal but what is. However I don't see the point in getting hung up on the detail when for now it's little more than a rumour.

I don't see how the access issue is a red herring? The piece of land has got housing on 3 sides and a railway embankment on the fourth. The widest access point is opposite the old Balne Lane library down a muck path between 2 houses and probably isn't wide enough to allow a road to be built through it for access for things like the emergency services!

Let's stick to getting those objections in.

Re: Being aware. : Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:17 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

OK Rodders, back in the days of Franchisin, BV was marked down for lack of parking facilities and one thing the area surrounding our current ground does have is plenty of street parking.
Similarly, although the current residents would not be chuffed about it, Thornes is surrounded by street parking AND has reasonable car parking.
Balne Lane fields have zero access and altough visiting fans could try their luck on tThe Peacock Estate and Blackthorn Way etc, there is nowhere near enough parking in the surrounding area.
I know that in your Utopian world of public transport use, there ARE some advantages but, come on.

I made a comparison to The AJ Bell stadium in my previous post, which you dont appear to acknowledge, maybe you've not been there but, you seem to be in denial about the need for parking, which, was totally missing form the "build a stadium regardless of whether Trinity want to play there" scheme. But, even with excellent public transport links and close proximity to the town centre (which is ok walking to the game but, pretty tough going back into town), there would still need to be substantial parking and that assumes that there is actually room for a 10/12,000 capacity stadium.

If there are difficulties getting to and from ANY ground that may be built, the project is doomed to fail and on the subject of parking, what do you think other clubs have or, are they all wrong but, you are right ? I dont think so.

Also, do you think that sponsors, players, coaching staff etc should walk form the centre of town

What's with the 'Rodders' bit, because someone disagrees with your sainted opinion it automatically makes them part of what you consider the enemy camp - sad.

Where did I say there would be no parking? There is clearly enough room for a stadium and car parking for staff, players, corporate and disabled plus few more IMO. See attached image which is to scale using BV as a footprint.

Perhaps you should do a little research before playing at being a town planner whilst dismissing the views of others.

Re: Being aware. : Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:19 pm  

As I said in my previous post, it's all smoke and mirrors, it will never happen at Balne Lane and Box must be laughing his head off at those who have actually fallen for this.
I'm not having a go at those of you who want to believe this as being a step forward (God knows we need one), but please open your eyes to the continued deceit that is being pedalled by those who seek to frustrate us at every opportunity !!

Re: Being aware. : Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:25 pm  

Fishermanscap wrote:

What's with the 'Rodders' bit, because someone disagrees with your sainted opinion it automatically makes them part of what you consider the enemy camp - sad.

Where did I say there would be no parking? There is clearly enough room for a stadium and car parking for staff, players, corporate and disabled plus few more IMO. See attached image which is to scale using BV as a footprint.

Perhaps you should do a little research before playing at being a town planner whilst dismissing the views of others.

...sorry Mr Box, but that is just laughable...is that a 30 metre long pitch or a Subbuteo table you've superimposed on there ????

I used to live on Aspen Close (at the top of the image) so am familiar with the site and there is no way that is to scale, and even if it was a viable proposition, that photo clearly proves that there is no viable access to the site other than on foot !!!

Re: Being aware. : Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:27 pm  

Lockers700 wrote:

I don't see how the access issue is a red herring? The piece of land has got housing on 3 sides and a railway embankment on the fourth. The widest access point is opposite the old Balne Lane library down a muck path between 2 houses and probably isn't wide enough to allow a road to be built through it for access for things like the emergency services!

Let's stick to getting those objections in.

Yes but that wouldn't be how it would end up if it actually went ahead would it - seriously would it? As I've clearly stated it would require the purchasing and demolition of some adjacent properties probably through compulsory purchase but it is possible with drive and ambition.

And this is the point I keep trying to make, it's the latter that's the real problem all the rest can be overcome if the will is there but IMO it isn't hence it won't happen.

However just because we don't think it will happen doesn't mean we should dismiss it out of hand because lets be clear we are running out of time and options and if we start turning our noses up at everything that we don't see as perfect we will also run out of sympathy, which would suit Box just fine.

We need to remain open minded. That said you are right getting the objections in has to be the number one priority for now.

Re: Being aware. : Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:28 pm  

FIL wrote:

:lol: ...sorry Mr Box, but that is just laughable...is that a 30 metre long pitch or a Subbuteo table you've superimposed on there ????

I used to live on Aspen Close (at the top of the image) so am familiar with the site and there is no way that is to scale, and even if it was a viable proposition, that photo clearly proves that there is no viabvle access to the site other then on foot !!!

I just thought the same as soon as I looked at it, but I have just done exactly what he has done on google maps and used to the same scale it comes out more or less the same as his... Maybe I was underestimating the size of the plot?

Re: Being aware. : Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:30 pm  

FIL wrote:

:lol: ...sorry Mr Box, but that is just laughable...is that a 30 metre long pitch or a Subbuteo table you've superimposed on there ????

I used to live on Aspen Close (at the top of the image) so am familiar with the site and there is no way that is to scale, and even if it was a viable proposition, that photo clearly proves that there is no viable access to the site other than on foot !!!

You need to grow up especially with the Box bit you sound pathetic.

OK Mr expert go on Google and do it yourself - just cut and paste one on top of the other from the same scale sat image assuming your bright enough to use Photoshop. See what you get and then come back and tell me GPS is all one big lie