Main Stand | Page 7 | Vital Football

Main Stand

Geedo61 said:
You are missing the point with the cost. The whole point of the apartments is that the profit generated from the sales will pay for the Mainstand. In effect we get the stand for free. This is why everyone wants a piece of the pie and why it isn’t an option to move
Click to expand...
Absolutely. The impression I have got from following the correspondence is that up to a point the stand is done and dusted, it is the apartments. The club have submitted at least 3 amended schemes in response to " we don't quite like that one have another go" helpful dialogues by RBC. Along with that they want all sorts of contributions to the perceived by them costs to the Borough which will be the result of the development.
 
Trickytreesreds said:
I'm no planning expert Raddy, I accept that.
But Forest are dealing with 3 councils here. It is out rageous that they are all after a piece of the pie, for something that contributes massively to the local economy.
I now think we should move. The cost of the Main stand is massive already, with the logistics involved. It wouldn't cost much more for a new stadium to be built . Sure we'd lose the iconic position, but all this bullshit would stop and we could tailor it to our requirements.
RBC in particular are bang out of order here.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. If it was me i would consider appealing to the secretary of state to get it passed. Unacceptable that a regionally important development is dragging on this long.
 
Geedo61 said:
You are missing the point with the cost. The whole point of the apartments is that the profit generated from the sales will pay for the Mainstand. In effect we get the stand for free. This is why everyone wants a piece of the pie and why it isn’t an option to move
Click to expand...

The flats mean we dont have to move. Of course we could move and the wfcg would become prime residential real estate, enough to build a new stadium (ish) but who wants to move?
 
radfordinlondon said:
The flats mean we dont have to move. Of course we could move and the wfcg would become prime residential real estate, enough to build a new stadium (ish) but who wants to move?
Click to expand...
Not quite. One of the things ND was able to accomplish was negotiating a 250 year lease with Nottingham City Council for the land that the City Ground stands on. We don't own it and we would not be able to develop it. The anomaly that enables us to build the apartment block is that strangely we do own the land that they would sit on
 
jbacsta said:
Not quite. One of the things ND was able to accomplish was negotiating a 250 year lease with Nottingham City Council for the land that the City Ground stands on. We don't own it and we would not be able to develop it. The anomaly that enables us to build the apartment block is that strangely we do own the land that they would sit on
Click to expand...

Was more thinking the city would build the houses, the finance helping towards a new stadium, they already have the land but i dont think the city or maranakis want to spend that kind of money.

Im from nottm, i would invest ALL of their money in the city if i cud.
 
radfordinlondon said:
Was more thinking the city would build the houses, the finance helping towards a new stadium, they already have the land but i dont think the city or maranakis want to spend that kind of money.

Im from nottm, i would invest ALL of their money in the city if i cud.
Click to expand...
you're from Mansfield ya little fibber
 
England are playing Italy tonight at molyneux. A thought occurred to me, if such an event could happen at the city ground then how grateful would rushcliffe businesses be if their council hampered the chance of that happening. I’d be looking for compo if I were them.
 
Imho the club should just bypass RBC and go straight to the minister and argue its regional investment. Its a legit route and one very suitable for this govt.

Maybe someone should remind them of euro 96 when wfcg was hosting internationals
 
radfordinlondon said:
Imho the club should just bypass RBC and go straight to the minister and argue its regional investment. Its a legit route and one very suitable for this govt.

Maybe someone should remind them of euro 96 when wfcg was hosting internationals
Click to expand...
I know what you mean and it would be an option. It would be very confrontational though and would sour any relation that the club may have with the Borough that they reside in.We are in the premiere league the new priority is ³tmaximising income from the facilities we have and so building a new stand now will be very problematical.
 
radfordinlondon said:
Imho the club should just bypass RBC and go straight to the minister and argue its regional investment. Its a legit route and one very suitable for this govt.

Maybe someone should remind them of euro 96 when wfcg was hosting internationals
Click to expand...
I would imagine that's the option you take when you are dealing with an intransigent Labour council, not a Tory one.

The problems with RBC should be a surprise to absolutely no one. NIMBYism and an ingrained distaste for football as a legacy of Thatcher
 
It would be confrontational in answer to jb and that is regrettable.

However pope is right, these nimby twats are actually holding back the whole city.

They have to go chaps
 
Pope John XXIII said:
I would imagine that's the option you take when you are dealing with an intransigent Labour council, not a Tory one.

The problems with RBC should be a surprise to absolutely no one. NIMBYism and an ingrained distaste for football as a legacy of Thatcher
Click to expand...
The Conservative MP for Rushcliffe was quoted as saying " let's get it done" when asked about the thing so no I don't think it's got much to do with political persuasions. To be honest I am at a loss to know quite what RBC are fucking about at other than sitting on their hands may be a habit they can't break.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.