Stadium Redevelopment

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Stadium Redevelopment

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 219 of 256 < 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 >

AERO 06 Nov 20 10.48pm
Would not Sainsbury's be better of Selling all the land to cpfc ? As in this climate would imagine they would be looking to close one or two of the less profitable ones .Although don't know if the Whithorse one is profitable or not ?
Alert a moderator to this post

AERO

06 Nov 20 10.48pm

Would not Sainsbury's be better of Selling all the land to cpfc ? As in this climate would imagine they would be looking to close one or two of the less profitable ones .Although don't know if the Whithorse one is profitable or not ?

Alert a moderator to this post

the.universal 07 Nov 20 12.38am
Originally posted by AERO Would not Sainsbury's be better of Selling all the land to cpfc ? As in this climate would imagine they would be looking to close one or two of the less profitable ones .Although don't know if the Whithorse one is profitable or not ? I assume it’s pretty profitable otherwise a deal would’ve been struck by now. Vive le Roy!
Alert a moderator to this post

the.universal 07 Nov 20 12.38am

Originally posted by AERO

I assume it’s pretty profitable otherwise a deal would’ve been struck by now.

Vive le Roy!

Alert a moderator to this post

becky over the moon 07 Nov 20 8.34am
Originally posted by dorking There is also the long term issue that CPFC will need full use of the 'supermarket' car park from 3 hours before kick off before every home game (because the 'club' car park becomes a 'Fan Plaza' on match days (apart from circa 20 spaces for players and 'VVIP's'). The supermarket car park will be needed for hospitality parking, coach parking and disabled parking. Sainsbury's effectively having no car park for 3 hours before every home game is going to make their store less viable on what is often their main trading day (Saturday) It'll be a busy next 12 months, even if we hear relatively little publicly, and it all takes place behind the scenes Isn't there or wasn't there a rule that Sainsbury's closed at mid-day on match days anyway, so that Palace had full use of the car park? I'm sure I remember this being the case A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers
Alert a moderator to this post \| Board Moderator

becky

over the moon 07 Nov 20 8.34am

Originally posted by dorking

There is also the long term issue that CPFC will need full use of the 'supermarket' car park from 3 hours before kick off before every home game (because the 'club' car park becomes a 'Fan Plaza' on match days (apart from circa 20 spaces for players and 'VVIP's'). The supermarket car park will be needed for hospitality parking, coach parking and disabled parking.

Sainsbury's effectively having no car park for 3 hours before every home game is going to make their store less viable on what is often their main trading day (Saturday)

It'll be a busy next 12 months, even if we hear relatively little publicly, and it all takes place behind the scenes

Isn't there or wasn't there a rule that Sainsbury's closed at mid-day on match days anyway, so that Palace had full use of the car park? I'm sure I remember this being the case

A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers

Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator

dorking 07 Nov 20 9.38am
The store closes one and a half hours before kick off, because the fire exits from the store lead straight into the Whitehorse Lane stand concourse! Noades always said that when Sainsburys ws built in the 1980s, that the agreement was 3 hours before, but that we allowed the store to stay open until 1.5 hours before for good relations in the most recent Premier League seasons, the club stewards have certainly taken control of the Sainsburys car park for longer than 1.5 hours before kick off.... the 'bottom' section is tethered off for local residents car parking, and the storage of those 'pitch lighting frames', seasonal hospitality pass holders can gain access even after the stewards don't let anyone else enter too. Sainsburys do allow 4.5 hours parking on matchdays (tell me another supermarket near a premier league ground where you can do that!!), so arriving at about a quarter to 1 (for a 3pm kick off game) would normally see you get in unchallenged, and through until leaving time after the game Edited by dorking (07 Nov 2020 9.40am)
Alert a moderator to this post

dorking

07 Nov 20 9.38am

The store closes one and a half hours before kick off, because the fire exits from the store lead straight into the Whitehorse Lane stand concourse!

Noades always said that when Sainsburys ws built in the 1980s, that the agreement was 3 hours before, but that we allowed the store to stay open until 1.5 hours before for good relations

in the most recent Premier League seasons, the club stewards have certainly taken control of the Sainsburys car park for longer than 1.5 hours before kick off....

the 'bottom' section is tethered off for local residents car parking, and the storage of those 'pitch lighting frames', seasonal hospitality pass holders can gain access even after the stewards don't let anyone else enter too.

Sainsburys do allow 4.5 hours parking on matchdays (tell me another supermarket near a premier league ground where you can do that!!), so arriving at about a quarter to 1 (for a 3pm kick off game) would normally see you get in unchallenged, and through until leaving time after the game

Edited by dorking (07 Nov 2020 9.40am)

Alert a moderator to this post

dreamwaverider London 07 Nov 20 9.50am
I bet Parish had little idea what he was getting involved in when he decided for Place to stay at Selhurst and try and build a new stand. Since our last stand, the Homesdale' was built the PC requirements surrounding planning have run away with themselves. I bet some of you 'experts' posting on here are public sector planning officers. If you are you should be ashamed at how the public sector has seized up the massive demand for housing in this country. Conservative estimates show we are now over one million residential dwelling short as a country. Planning, run by local authorities must be one of the slowest processes in this country. It will be at least 5 years from initiating the Selhurst dream before the project gets underway, probably longer. For 'impatient' developers and fans like myself, Parish would have been far better advised to have found a brown field site in the region which would have been a far easier option. Having had years of frustration dealing with government funded bureaucrats in councils and the NHS I am appalled at the attitude of these types. Most of them take great pleasure in seeing developers squirm and go out of their way to frustrate much needed growth. If they smell money, as was mentioned above re premier league wealth re the 106 well then they will gobble you up for breakfast. Maybe thats what created brown paper bags. What a foul world this has become.
Alert a moderator to this post

dreamwaverider

London 07 Nov 20 9.50am

Send a Private Message to dreamwaverider

I bet Parish had little idea what he was getting involved in when he decided for Place to stay at Selhurst and try and build a new stand.
Since our last stand, the Homesdale' was built the PC requirements surrounding planning have run away with themselves.
I bet some of you 'experts' posting on here are public sector planning officers. If you are you should be ashamed at how the public sector has seized up the massive demand for housing in this country. Conservative estimates show we are now over one million residential dwelling short as a country.
Planning, run by local authorities must be one of the slowest processes in this country. It will be at least 5 years from initiating the Selhurst dream before the project gets underway, probably longer.
For 'impatient' developers and fans like myself, Parish would have been far better advised to have found a brown field site in the region which would have been a far easier option.
Having had years of frustration dealing with government funded bureaucrats in councils and the NHS I am appalled at the attitude of these types. Most of them take great pleasure in seeing developers squirm and go out of their way to frustrate much needed growth. If they smell money, as was mentioned above re premier league wealth re the 106 well then they will gobble you up for breakfast.
Maybe thats what created brown paper bags.
What a foul world this has become.

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 07 Nov 20 12.13pm
Originally posted by dreamwaverider I bet Parish had little idea what he was getting involved in when he decided for Place to stay at Selhurst and try and build a new stand. Since our last stand, the Homesdale' was built the PC requirements surrounding planning have run away with themselves. I bet some of you 'experts' posting on here are public sector planning officers. If you are you should be ashamed at how the public sector has seized up the massive demand for housing in this country. Conservative estimates show we are now over one million residential dwelling short as a country. Planning, run by local authorities must be one of the slowest processes in this country. It will be at least 5 years from initiating the Selhurst dream before the project gets underway, probably longer. For 'impatient' developers and fans like myself, Parish would have been far better advised to have found a brown field site in the region which would have been a far easier option. Having had years of frustration dealing with government funded bureaucrats in councils and the NHS I am appalled at the attitude of these types. Most of them take great pleasure in seeing developers squirm and go out of their way to frustrate much needed growth. If they smell money, as was mentioned above re premier league wealth re the 106 well then they will gobble you up for breakfast. Maybe thats what created brown paper bags. What a foul world this has become. I hope your not suggesting that Greedy Khan and Croydon council expect palace to fund their problems. One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 07 Nov 20 12.13pm

Originally posted by dreamwaverider

I hope your not suggesting that Greedy Khan and Croydon council expect palace to fund their problems.

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 07 Nov 20 12.42pm
Princess Anne is turning the first sod. Red and Blue Army!
Alert a moderator to this post

ASCPFC

Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 07 Nov 20 12.42pm

Princess Anne is turning the first sod.

Red and Blue Army!

Alert a moderator to this post

TheBigToePunt 07 Nov 20 2.51pm
Originally posted by dreamwaverider I bet Parish had little idea what he was getting involved in when he decided for Place to stay at Selhurst and try and build a new stand. Since our last stand, the Homesdale' was built the PC requirements surrounding planning have run away with themselves. I bet some of you 'experts' posting on here are public sector planning officers. If you are you should be ashamed at how the public sector has seized up the massive demand for housing in this country. Conservative estimates show we are now over one million residential dwelling short as a country. Planning, run by local authorities must be one of the slowest processes in this country. It will be at least 5 years from initiating the Selhurst dream before the project gets underway, probably longer. For 'impatient' developers and fans like myself, Parish would have been far better advised to have found a brown field site in the region which would have been a far easier option. Having had years of frustration dealing with government funded bureaucrats in councils and the NHS I am appalled at the attitude of these types. Most of them take great pleasure in seeing developers squirm and go out of their way to frustrate much needed growth. If they smell money, as was mentioned above re premier league wealth re the 106 well then they will gobble you up for breakfast. Maybe thats what created brown paper bags. What a foul world this has become. I think perhaps your knowledge is lagging a little behind your emotions, and to be frank it doesn't seem like you'd have to get very emotional for that to happen. If you can point me towards an available, affordable brownfield site in South London big enough to house a 40,000 seater stadium and the requisite transport links then I'll be happy to amend my view. If you can top that by explaining how a new-build stadium would somehow be exempt from the type of planning contributions in the current S106 agreement then I might even give some credence to the rest of what you say. For those not in the know, a brownfield site is one within the urban area which has been developed before in some way (so not a park or a field etc). If you are beginning to think such a huge plot might be hard to find and/or hideously expensive (particularly compared to land we already own and which has a football ground on it), congratulations: You are living in the real world.
Alert a moderator to this post

TheBigToePunt

07 Nov 20 2.51pm

Originally posted by dreamwaverider

I bet Parish had little idea what he was getting involved in when he decided for Place to stay at Selhurst and try and build a new stand.
Since our last stand, the Homesdale' was built the PC requirements surrounding planning have run away with themselves.
I bet some of you 'experts' posting on here are public sector planning officers. If you are you should be ashamed at how the public sector has seized up the massive demand for housing in this country. Conservative estimates show we are now over one million residential dwelling short as a country.
Planning, run by local authorities must be one of the slowest processes in this country. It will be at least 5 years from initiating the Selhurst dream before the project gets underway, probably longer.
For 'impatient' developers and fans like myself, Parish would have been far better advised to have found a brown field site in the region which would have been a far easier option.
Having had years of frustration dealing with government funded bureaucrats in councils and the NHS I am appalled at the attitude of these types. Most of them take great pleasure in seeing developers squirm and go out of their way to frustrate much needed growth. If they smell money, as was mentioned above re premier league wealth re the 106 well then they will gobble you up for breakfast.
Maybe thats what created brown paper bags.
What a foul world this has become.

I think perhaps your knowledge is lagging a little behind your emotions, and to be frank it doesn't seem like you'd have to get very emotional for that to happen.

If you can point me towards an available, affordable brownfield site in South London big enough to house a 40,000 seater stadium and the requisite transport links then I'll be happy to amend my view. If you can top that by explaining how a new-build stadium would somehow be exempt from the type of planning contributions in the current S106 agreement then I might even give some credence to the rest of what you say.

For those not in the know, a brownfield site is one within the urban area which has been developed before in some way (so not a park or a field etc). If you are beginning to think such a huge plot might be hard to find and/or hideously expensive (particularly compared to land we already own and which has a football ground on it), congratulations: You are living in the real world.

Alert a moderator to this post

dreamwaverider London 08 Nov 20 9.51am
Originally posted by TheBigToePunt I think perhaps your knowledge is lagging a little behind your emotions, and to be frank it doesn't seem like you'd have to get very emotional for that to happen. If you can point me towards an available, affordable brownfield site in South London big enough to house a 40,000 seater stadium and the requisite transport links then I'll be happy to amend my view. If you can top that by explaining how a new-build stadium would somehow be exempt from the type of planning contributions in the current S106 agreement then I might even give some credence to the rest of what you say. For those not in the know, a brownfield site is one within the urban area which has been developed before in some way (so not a park or a field etc). If you are beginning to think such a huge plot might be hard to find and/or hideously expensive (particularly compared to land we already own and which has a football ground on it), congratulations: You are living in the real world. Crystal Palace park national sports center
Alert a moderator to this post

dreamwaverider

London 08 Nov 20 9.51am

Originally posted by TheBigToePunt

I think perhaps your knowledge is lagging a little behind your emotions, and to be frank it doesn't seem like you'd have to get very emotional for that to happen.

Crystal Palace park national sports center

Alert a moderator to this post

TheBigToePunt 08 Nov 20 11.42am
Originally posted by dreamwaverider Crystal Palace park national sports center Leaving aside that the club examined the viability of that idea before deciding to redevelop Selhurst, let's return to the point: Building a new stadium somewhere else does not, as you wrongly suggest, remove the 'burden' of having to make contributions to the local area as part of getting planning permission. If anything it would make the burden significantly greater as the extent of new development would be greater. I stand by my initial conclusion. You have developed very strong views without knowing what you're talking about.
Alert a moderator to this post

TheBigToePunt

08 Nov 20 11.42am

Originally posted by dreamwaverider

Crystal Palace park national sports center

Leaving aside that the club examined the viability of that idea before deciding to redevelop Selhurst, let's return to the point:

Building a new stadium somewhere else does not, as you wrongly suggest, remove the 'burden' of having to make contributions to the local area as part of getting planning permission. If anything it would make the burden significantly greater as the extent of new development would be greater.

I stand by my initial conclusion. You have developed very strong views without knowing what you're talking about.

Alert a moderator to this post

jeeagles 08 Nov 20 1.56pm
Originally posted by dreamwaverider Crystal Palace park national sports center You’d then be negotiating with multiple councils rather than just one. That’s why nothing has ever been done with the site. It’s unfortunate the club is located in Croydon. Whilst in 2010 the council realised that they couldn’t loose the football club, they’ve never really been supportive of helping the club or anyone else develop.
Alert a moderator to this post

jeeagles

08 Nov 20 1.56pm

Originally posted by dreamwaverider

Crystal Palace park national sports center

You’d then be negotiating with multiple councils rather than just one. That’s why nothing has ever been done with the site.

It’s unfortunate the club is located in Croydon. Whilst in 2010 the council realised that they couldn’t loose the football club, they’ve never really been supportive of helping the club or anyone else develop.

Alert a moderator to this post

dreamwaverider London 08 Nov 20 3.19pm
Originally posted by TheBigToePunt Leaving aside that the club examined the viability of that idea before deciding to redevelop Selhurst, let's return to the point: Building a new stadium somewhere else does not, as you wrongly suggest, remove the 'burden' of having to make contributions to the local area as part of getting planning permission. If anything it would make the burden significantly greater as the extent of new development would be greater. I stand by my initial conclusion. You have developed very strong views without knowing what you're talking about. And what makes you so qualified to come up with such a hostile response?
Alert a moderator to this post

dreamwaverider

London 08 Nov 20 3.19pm

Originally posted by TheBigToePunt

Leaving aside that the club examined the viability of that idea before deciding to redevelop Selhurst, let's return to the point:

I stand by my initial conclusion. You have developed very strong views without knowing what you're talking about.

And what makes you so qualified to come up with such a hostile response?

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 219 of 256 < 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Stadium Redevelopment

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors