Brockhall STC - planning permission application ?

[Miller11]

[Exiled_Rover]

12 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

I thought it was rumoured to be Mrs Desai's son?  I met someone I understood to be him a few years ago when, if it was him, he looked about 17 or 18.

Really polite intelligent young lad. If he was involved in the running of the Club I wouldn't have any worries subject to him having acquired the necessary qualifications in the interim of course.

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

God we've fallen so far.

[Gone to seed]

35 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

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

God we've fallen so far.

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

[booth]

43 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

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

God we've fallen so far.

The hope is that the lad is into football and wants to win football matches. But yes it's a poor do when we're hoping that a young lad can come in and do a better job than people 2 and 3 times his age.

[Leonard Venkhater]

49 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

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

God we've fallen so far.

And further to go, I fear........

[JHRover]

https://www.ribblevalley.gov.uk/planningApplication25634

The club sought planning permission in 2015 to construct floodlight pylons on the academy site. They sought this because it is one of the requirements of a Category A academy.

The application was refused because the light overspill and reflection would cause increased visibility of the training ground, cause harm to nearby residential properties through noise and light disturbance. Also concerns about the impact upon ecology and protected species. 

This was why the floodlit pitch was then built at the senior site instead.

So I wonder how they are going to get around this with their "all in one" complex down at the bottom?

[Gone to seed]

7 minutes ago, JHRover said:

https://www.ribblevalley.gov.uk/planningApplication25634

The club sought planning permission in 2015 to construct floodlight pylons on the academy site. They sought this because it is one of the requirements of a Category A academy.

The application was refused because the light overspill and reflection would cause increased visibility of the training ground, cause harm to nearby residential properties through noise and light disturbance. Also concerns about the impact upon ecology and protected species. 

This was why the floodlit pitch was then built at the senior site instead.

So I wonder how they are going to get around this with their "all in one" complex down at the bottom?

There's an easy answer to this - they aren't! And there will never be any attempt to do so, because the whole thing is a crock, a scam, a blatant attempt to sell off assets and to downgrade the whole operation at Blackburn Rovers - because they (whoever 'they' are behind the scenes) can, as things stand 😞

[Mattyblue]

Not taking long for this all to unravel, is it...

[JHRover]

I'm not a planning expert. But I would think that if 6 floodlight pylons would be refused due the above concerns then constructing a 50ft+ tall indoor training pitch might be difficult to get through.

[roversfan99]

4 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Dont think Mowbray is bother about money. Never seem Money motivated imo

He walked away from Coventry with nothing. 

 

Some of the conspiracy theories seem baseless at this point, but equally, like anyone, of course he is "bothered" about money, everyone is.

[broadsword]

 

36 minutes ago, JHRover said:

I'm not a planning expert. But I would think that if 6 floodlight pylons would be refused due the above concerns then constructing a 50ft+ tall indoor training pitch might be difficult to get through.

Mowbray/Venus/Waggott - get it right up ye. Best news I've had in ages (but not out of the woods yet). 

 

If this was intended as loss mitigation and venkys are in the departure lounge, might we dare hope that rehousing planning permission would hasten them to the gate? 

[Mattyblue]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Some of the conspiracy theories seem baseless at this point, but equally, like anyone, of course he is "bothered" about money, everyone is.

Just like every manager of ours coming from the HSH/SEM stable, Venus/Waggott ending up at a second club in a row that now wants to build housing on the training ground will be just a coincidence, I’m sure...

[RJM]

1 hour ago, JHRover said:

https://www.ribblevalley.gov.uk/planningApplication25634

The club sought planning permission in 2015 to construct floodlight pylons on the academy site. They sought this because it is one of the requirements of a Category A academy.

The application was refused because the light overspill and reflection would cause increased visibility of the training ground, cause harm to nearby residential properties through noise and light disturbance. Also concerns about the impact upon ecology and protected species. 

This was why the floodlit pitch was then built at the senior site instead.

So I wonder how they are going to get around this with their "all in one" complex down at the bottom?

Because if they don't bother with the academy anymore they won't need a floodlit pitch!  I have also heard that they are stopping the education system that is currently set up with Moorland School (another must have for Cat A academy)  So no floodlight pictch, no education = no Cat 1 Academy anymore. 

[Mattyblue]

The announcement that we are now ‘following the Brentford method, that will lead to pathways to the first team etc etc’ can’t be far off...

[Herbie6590]

3 hours ago, Dan said:

Sorry, I’m no expert 🙂 Whatever it is though, it isn’t good. They aren’t switched on, attentive or reactive enough to set us up to win promotion. 

I’ve never understood why they pump all that money in and then don’t seem to care.  How hard would it be to get someone with some football knowledge advising them? 

This season was win or bust. We’re not going up now(they’ve waited far too long to change the manager, it was still possible up to recently), so I believe they will be calling it a day. After they’ve recouped/mitigated as much as they can of course. 

Won’t be long until they’ve flushed their precious baby down the toilet.  

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.

[Herbie6590]

2 hours ago, Dan said:

Every season we don’t go up, we are losing massive amounts of money. If we did go up, Venky’s would see a large amount of money come into the club. The longer it goes on, the more they lose. 
 

This is just my opinion, it’s not been officially said anywhere. 

That’s a pretty accurate summary...

[Stuart]

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

Not taking long for this all to unravel, is it...

It only unravels if the Cat 1 status is important...

[JHRover]

1 minute ago, Stuart said:

It only unravels if the Cat 1 status is important...

They've made a rod for their backs by mentioning the indoor pitch being built down there. That will be the expectation now. If that can't be built then not even the imbeciles on Facebook will be able to claim that its anything but a drastic downscale of the operation.

[Herbie6590]

From the brochure....30 square miles ? 🤔 Am I missing something...?

[Herbie6590]

5 minutes ago, JHRover said:

They've made a rod for their backs by mentioning the indoor pitch being built down there. That will be the expectation now. If that can't be built then not even the imbeciles on Facebook will be able to claim that its anything but a drastic downscale of the operation.

“Tony doesn’t like artificial pitches as they cause injury so this makes sense...”

[Crimpshrine]

1 hour ago, JHRover said:

https://www.ribblevalley.gov.uk/planningApplication25634

The club sought planning permission in 2015 to construct floodlight pylons on the academy site. They sought this because it is one of the requirements of a Category A academy.

The application was refused because the light overspill and reflection would cause increased visibility of the training ground, cause harm to nearby residential properties through noise and light disturbance. Also concerns about the impact upon ecology and protected species. 

This was why the floodlit pitch was then built at the senior site instead.

So I wonder how they are going to get around this with their "all in one" complex down at the bottom?

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 ?

[Herbie6590]

Just now, 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 ?

@J*B Have we received an invite ? 

[Rogerb]

2 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

From the brochure....30 square miles ? 🤔 Am I missing something...?

19point327 acres think it should read

[Crimpshrine]

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

@J*B Have we received an invite ? 

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.

[JHRover]

23 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

From the brochure....30 square miles ? 🤔 Am I missing something...?

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

A mistake made twice in the same document? Odd.