Dean Court Redevelopment

[RobTrent]

Eddie Howe, Stan Sloggitt and Gordon the Tramp.

Michael B Jordan?

 

[thegazzyb]

Stick RoboFletch on top of it and it's all sorted.

How about adding this as a little nod of eternal gratitude to that lot down the road and their fifty pence pieces from back in the day ?

 

[table]

Re-introduce the Rapunzel towers : )

 

[GrahamH]

Gord

Eddie Howe, Stan Sloggitt and Gordon the Tramp.

Gordon will be incorporated into the weathercock on top the the new clock tower.

 

[Sorry Roger]

Going back to the rear wall of the South Stand, the Urban Planner suggested something along these lines:

 

[RobTrent]

Going back to the rear wall of the South Stand, the Urban Planner suggested something along these lines:

View attachment 21461

It still looks like a wall!

 

[SlowDownDerek]

Going back to the rear wall of the South Stand, the Urban Planner suggested something along these lines:

View attachment 21461

As you say, making it look more like a sporting venue as opposed to an Amazon warehouse isn't unreasonable.

 

[kirsikka]

That looks alright to me, plus it doesn't look like it's too hard to do. Surely this won't be an impediment to things getting the go ahead?

 

[DJ]

This is the answer.

 

[northstandmark]

Plenty of grounds built or redeveloped in / around park land. I gather most commonly, trees are used to break up the outline of the structure when viewed from across a park, making the build less imposing.

I'm sure AFCB and BCP will have considered that as it's hardly rocket science.

 

[SlowDownDerek]

Plenty of grounds built or redeveloped in / around park land. I gather most commonly, trees are used to break up the outline of the structure when viewed from across a park, making the build less imposing.

I'm sure AFCB and BCP will have considered that as it's hardly rocket science.

Sounds like BCP has told AFCB to reconsider it tbf.

 

[sjhafcb]

Going back to the rear wall of the South Stand, the Urban Planner suggested something along these lines:

View attachment 21461

Sounds like BCP has told AFCB to reconsider it tbf.

The club has since sent a rebuttal letter covering various concerns, South Stand appearance being one of them. To summarise, the club are suggesting they’ve played by the necessary rules and that it is also a lot better than Ted Mac. Doesn’t sound like they are keen to change so will be interesting to see which side gives way.

 

[yoof]

View attachment 21462

This is the answer.

Real shame they discounted green wall on fire grounds - something like the below on the south would have broken it up nicely and integrated better in my opinion.

 

[SlowDownDerek]

The club has since sent a rebuttal letter covering various concerns, South Stand appearance being one of them. To summarise, the club are suggesting they’ve played by the necessary rules and that it is also a lot better than Ted Mac. Doesn’t sound like they are keen to change so will be interesting to see which side gives way.

Feels like relatively minor details either way.

 

[yoof]

Going back to the rear wall of the South Stand, the Urban Planner suggested something along these lines:

View attachment 21461

There’s so much you could do with that prominent elevation - that suggestion from the urban designer is pretty depressing,

 

[RobTrent]

Is there any other ground in the UK that has such a tight perimeter wall around it?

 

[yoof]

The lost light report (summary: there isn’t any which is significant for planning purposes) is very positive for getting approval for the North & East stand expansions.

I was trying to think of a precedent of expanding a stand in a similar setting.

The closest I could think of was the south stand at Ashton Gate.






The Bristol City South stand has a similar height to our new north and east stands - and importantly theirs appears to go maybe 1-2m closer to the neighbouring properties (or let’s say the same distance if my scaling is slightly out).

Precedent + light survey + 3rd party professional view hopefully means approval.

 

[yoof]

I was trying to think of a precedent of expanding a stand in a similar setting.

The closest I could think of was the south stand at Ashton Gate.

View attachment 21466

View attachment 21467

View attachment 21468
The Bristol City South stand has a similar height to our new north and east stands - and importantly theirs appears to go maybe 1-2m closer to the neighbouring properties (or let’s say the same distance if my scaling is slightly out).

Precedent + light survey + 3rd party professional view hopefully means approval.

Just to caveat my earlier post - the BCFC distances are very similar to the comparable distances of the Thistlebarrow Road properties - Middleton gardens is a lot closer. I might struggle to find precedent for that!

 

[RobTrent]

So how might the political changes affect the stadium?

 

[BFC1]

So how might the political changes affect the stadium?

Not at all - Town Councils are consultees only. As they are not yet operating and the consultation period has ended I’m not sure they’ll even get that opportunity. They could write a representation but it would carry no real weight. However, would Reform be anti Stadium -I v much doubt it - going on from there non immigration policies. Sadly I suspect they may also see some of our ‘brethren’ as potential fertile ground for potential votes.