Brockhall STC - planning permission application ?

[Dan]

44 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

I was interviewed by Gregor Robertson for the Times last year for the 10 year anniversary (lack of modesty klaxon) & I likened Venky’s to someone who buys a stately home, sacks all the gardeners & maintenance staff, then burns it to the ground...then thinks...”Perhaps we should think about rebuilding it ?”

Only now, they’ve reverted to Venky’s 1.0 & seem set upon a course of further destruction of the legacy.

Great summary! The lack of communication from them means that we’ve no idea what their plans are, but like you say, it looks like they’ve reverted to the old Venky’s. 

[JHRover]

I can only assume that the 19000  figure should be square metres rather than acres. Thats the only explanation that makes any sense.

Not off to a good start with this exciting project are they?

News leaked from fans and forced to hastily release a statement

Nobody putting their name to it

Manager denying any involvement

Inadequate site to accommodate what is needed.

Company instructed to prepare plans can't even distinguish between square metres and acres.

Maybe that explains why they think they can get it all on one site. They might have measured everything in inches.

I'm sure we are in good hands...

[RevidgeBlue]

3 hours ago, Exiled_Rover said:

You'd have no problems with a 20 something running the club?

God we've fallen so far.

Not what I said to be fair.

I said having this particular person being "involved" in the running of the Club once he had got the appropriate qualifications wouldn't particularly alarm me. I also thought it was self evident that that meant he would have to obtain the necessary experience before taking on a major role.

(If it ever happened) 

[RevidgeBlue]

49 minutes ago, Crimpshrine said:

Next Fans Forum meeting is 8th March so pre-meet must be 1st March. This question has to be put to Waggott. Could the BRFCS rep put this on the agenda please ?

If you were trying to do your best to ensure the plan went through that would be a good idea.

Would it not be better to keep that up your sleeve and use it as an objection to the proposal rather than pre warn the Club of any potential objections so they can think of a response?

I think it would be however be  fair game to give them both barrels regarding the covenant protecting the use of the land and that the plan would not be respecting Jack's legacy.

[rigger]

4 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

If you were trying to do your best to ensure the plan went through that would be a good idea.

Would it not be better to keep that up your sleeve and use it as an objection to the proposal rather than pre warn the Club of any potential objections so they can think of a response?

I think it would be however be  fair game to give them both barrels regarding the covenant protecting the use of the land and that the plan would not be respecting Jack's legacy.

Ask them to outline the benefits to the football team, of the development. Not just that it is easier, to have everything under one roof.

[Crimpshrine]

11 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

If you were trying to do your best to ensure the plan went through that would be a good idea.

Would it not be better to keep that up your sleeve and use it as an objection to the proposal rather than pre warn the Club of any potential objections so they can think of a response?

I think it would be however be  fair game to give them both barrels regarding the covenant protecting the use of the land and that the plan would not be respecting Jack's legacy.

You may be right.

On the other hand it could make Waggott admit that a Cat A Academy will not be possible at the new site and be open about it - thus exposing the real purpose of the proposals.

Otherwise they can forge ahead with plans and then say at a later date "We can't maintain Cat A due to building restrictions we were unaware of previously"

Fingers crossed none of this gets off the ground anyway.

[RevidgeBlue]

48 minutes ago, Crimpshrine said:

You may be right.

On the other hand it could make Waggott admit that a Cat A Academy will not be possible at the new site and be open about it - thus exposing the real purpose of the proposals.

Otherwise they can forge ahead with plans and then say at a later date "We can't maintain Cat A due to building restrictions we were unaware of previously"

Fingers crossed none of this gets off the ground anyway.

Thanks for the reply.

The more titbits of information about this proposed scheme that people are unable to unearth I think the more inevitable it is anyway that the cash grab for the housing will soon be accompanied by an announcement that the Academy is being scrapped or downgraded and we'll be moving towards a different model.

(Which would probably consist of us simply making even more phone calls to PL Clubs asking them to let us borrow youngsters in exchange for game time)

Of Course "New state of the art training centre" if you take it at face value sounds a lot more palatable than "Academy to be scrapped"

I would ask them if they've costed out upgrading the existing sites to make them "state of the art" as presumably that would be a lot cheaper in itself than knocking down the existing Academy and building a completely new facility. If they say "No" then the next question then should be "why not?" to which the only logical answer would seem to be that someone wants the money for the housing.

Also need to try and ascertain what the net profit would be from the scheme, where the money would be going and if it was going back to the Club what purpose it was being earmarked for.

Might also be useful to cite Mowbray's comments from the Lancs Live article in which he said that the current Academy site on it's own would not be sufficient.

So why would it be any different with a new building?

Good luck.

Edited February 24, 2021 by RevidgeBlue

[tomphil]

The Brentford model is all well and good but i doubt they had a starting point like we have now. I'd wager they went that route because they didn't have what we have so we are downgrading whichever way it's dressed up. 

Plus you need the right people doing it, just because they might shoehorn everything together doesn't mean Mowbray and his clan will replicate what Brentford do on the pitch and in the league.  Chances are it won't resemble that and will more resemble what we see right now !

The agents involved with BRFC will be happy though that's assured. 

[Gone to seed]

Maybe this whole thing is a wind up by some knuckle-dragging six fingered WUM with too much time on their hands after all?? I'm sure there are claret and blue squatters amongst Brockhall's finest.. 😆

[AllRoverAsia]

4 hours ago, JHRover said:

The same document states the senior training centre is 19,140 acres. 

A mistake made twice in the same document? Odd.

it's 19.14 - and is the IQ of the Vs, Mowbray, Waggott and Venus added together

More seriously, I have seen 19.14 expressed as 19,140 in some Europe countries.

Is it also how numbers are expressed in India?

 

Edited February 24, 2021 by AllRoverAsia

[Exiled_Rover]

6 hours ago, WIR Second Coming said:

A 23 year old just took on Sunderland...

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/feb/18/efl-confirms-takeover-of-sunderland-by-23-year-old-frenchman-louis-dreyfus

He's spending his dad's money and we've no idea how that will turn out.

[Dan]

27 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

it's 19.14 - and is the IQ of the Vs, Mowbray, Waggott and Venus added together

More seriously, I have seen 19.14 expressed as 19,140 in some Europe countries.

Is it also how numbers are expressed in India?

 

 

[JHRover]

38 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

it's 19.14 - and is the IQ of the Vs, Mowbray, Waggott and Venus added together

More seriously, I have seen 19.14 expressed as 19,140 in some Europe countries.

Is it also how numbers are expressed in India?

 

That's still far too big. 1 football pitch is roughly 1 acre. There's no way there's 19 acres on each site.

[AllRoverAsia]

5 minutes ago, JHRover said:

That's still far too big. 1 football pitch is roughly 1 acre. There's no way there's 19 acres on each site.

The governing body for international soccer, Fédération Internationale de Football Association (International Federation of Association Football, or FIFA) has set its standard range for soccer field dimensions at 69,300-86,400 square feet, or 1.59-1.98 acres. This is the range for field sizes for competitions like the World Cup. Their optimum field size is 76,590 square feet, which equals 1.77 acres.

[JHRover]

Just now, AllRoverAsia said:

The governing body for international soccer, Fédération Internationale de Football Association (International Federation of Association Football, or FIFA) has set its standard range for soccer field dimensions at 69,300-86,400 square feet, or 1.59-1.98 acres. This is the range for field sizes for competitions like the World Cup. Their optimum field size is 76,590 square feet, which equals 1.77 acres.

So maximum 2 acres per pitch. There are only 5 pitches on the academy, space for a sixth where the car park is. Never get 9 or 10 pitches on it.

[AllRoverAsia]

1 minute ago, JHRover said:

So maximum 2 acres per pitch. There are only 5 pitches on the academy, space for a sixth where the car park is. Never get 9 or 10 pitches on it.

Too small by far OR big enough for just First team and a Dev squad of sorts

FYI - Ewood Park at 105m x 69m is 1.79 acres

[SamTheShrew]

5 hours ago, JHRover said:

I can only assume that the 19000  figure should be square metres rather than acres. Thats the only explanation that makes any sense.

Not off to a good start with this exciting project are they?

News leaked from fans and forced to hastily release a statement

Nobody putting their name to it

Manager denying any involvement

Inadequate site to accommodate what is needed.

Company instructed to prepare plans can't even distinguish between square metres and acres.

Maybe that explains why they think they can get it all on one site. They might have measured everything in inches.

I'm sure we are in good hands...

Akin to this. Better to laugh than cry I guess https://youtu.be/Pyh1Va_mYWI

[J*B]

6 hours ago, Crimpshrine said:

The fans forum is the bi-monthly meeting with the club. Each recognised fan group is represented ( Ewood Blues, Disabled supporters, Rovers Trust, Proud Rovers etc ) Reps can put questions forward from anyone in their group but it has to be added to the agenda in advance. BRFCS has a rep at each meeting I believe.

No invite for us this time. Is it Lindsay?

[alcd]

Land with planning permission for residential development has a value of about £600,000 per acre in the North (closer to £1m in the south east) so 20 acres (approx) has a sale value of £12m. As rule of thumb the land value is about one third of the value of the completed dwellings. In that case each of 170 houses would have a sale value of about £200k each. In practice there will be further costs for the approach roads and community buildings so asking prices likely to be c£150k. Based on this analysis Venkys are sacrificing the Academy for very little in relation to either their debt or the potential value of the Academy. They must be desperate.

[tomphil]

Yes some of the figures banded about are a bit far fetched. I think what they'd draw back from after all the costs etc this might cover a new pitch but that's about it.

That won't matter to the filthy vultures in the middle driving it forwards though.

[Crimpshrine]

3 hours ago, J*B said:

No invite for us this time. Is it Lindsay?

Sorry, crossed wires I think. I am talking about the regular fans forum, not the twice yearly consultation meeting open to a wider audience. I believe BRFCS has a rep on the fans forum.

[J*B]

6 hours ago, Crimpshrine said:

Sorry, crossed wires I think. I am talking about the regular fans forum, not the twice yearly consultation meeting open to a wider audience. I believe BRFCS has a rep on the fans forum.

Not that we know about!

[Mattyblue]

Ste B was always on it, but I don’t think he joined as a brfcs rep, just a private citizen!

[Herbie6590]

Listeners to today’s Price of Football podcast will have heard a discussion regarding Coventry City’s training ground at Ryton being once more on the market to facilitate a housing development... 

 

[Mike E]

10 hours ago, Crimpshrine said:

Sorry, crossed wires I think. I am talking about the regular fans forum, not the twice yearly consultation meeting open to a wider audience. I believe BRFCS has a rep on the fans forum.

Possibly thinking of @only2garners (if I've got the right guy) who posts the minutes sometimes?