[Albion] Albion not happy with the council .....

[dazzer6666]

"You have to admire the sheer crass nature of the football club.

Not allowed to take photos during a game at the Amex as it reduces there marketing rights and cash flow yet expect the council to let them film in the city free of charge.

A business that makes millions yet totally contradicts its claims to supporting the local economy by £500 million.

no mention of the £150 million spend on foreign players removing £150 million from the economy.

Claim that due to working with sodexo they employ 800 people, most of them are students on minimum wage for a 4 hour shift 18 times a year!

This club however much we want the to do well on the pitch are an absolute disgrace off it."


Gotta love the Argus comments section.

Probably [MENTION=23111]Dougie[/MENTION]

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Agreed - the impressions I saw of the planned hotel didn't really look in keeping at all with what we already have - the site is also actually in the Park, not adjacent to it...........

News to me.

 

[Napper]

Certainly sounds from Perry like some applications for work around the Amex are not far away . Hopefully they involve more options to booze

 

[Bold Seagull]

I don't know......reading the Argus article it's a bit contradictory in that it's been 'abandoned', but there are 'other plans'.

I think they had some kind of partnership arrangement with a hotel and the healthcare provider that was all tied into a contract to achieve planning by a certain date, otherwise grant/funding falls through, Perry appeared to indicate this, otherwise they would have just gone in with a revised scheme as they were only a bit of a design approach tweak from getting it through.

 

[knocky1]

Does he know that the Council that denied the hotel planning is not the Council of today?

 

[Foul Play Rocks]

Loving Perry's rugged beard

With his new beard he was mistaken on the Facebook page as Rolf Harris. There are some cheeky chaps about.

 

[Uter]

Barbs has gone a bit Argus letters page here; more cars in our city isn’t the answer Paul.

Bit bizarre isn't it. I assume he means in the city rather than at the ground. I am not with him on that. A better park and ride for the city I can get behind, but more/cheaper parking in general isn't going to alleviate anything at all.

I'd imagine paying for filming permits is fairly standard wherever you go.

To be fair, I'd guess he was speaking off the cuff.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

Good job the latest elections brought an ardent, local born supporter into the Withdean Ward.

 

[Stat Brother]

Bit bizarre isn't it. I assume he means in the city rather than at the ground. I am not with him on that. A better park and ride for the city I can get behind, but more/cheaper parking in general isn't going to alleviate anything at all.

I'd imagine paying for filming permits is fairly standard wherever you go.

To be fair, I'd guess he was speaking off the cuff.

All the more reason to wave the permits off if you want to encourage a sudden global audience.

 

[Magic Sponge]

Certainly sounds from Perry like some applications for work around the Amex are not far away . Hopefully they involve more options to booze

I've always said it would make a good location for a new larger supporters bar that all ages can access.

 

[Grombleton]

"You have to admire the sheer crass nature of the football club.

Not allowed to take photos during a game at the Amex as it reduces there marketing rights and cash flow yet expect the council to let them film in the city free of charge.

A business that makes millions yet totally contradicts its claims to supporting the local economy by £500 million.

no mention of the £150 million spend on foreign players removing £150 million from the economy.

Claim that due to working with sodexo they employ 800 people, most of them are students on minimum wage for a 4 hour shift 18 times a year!

This club however much we want the to do well on the pitch are an absolute disgrace off it."


Gotta love the Argus comments section.

I avoid the Argus Comments section like the PLAGUE. It's akin to reading YouTube comments, you're virtually guaranteed to lose IQ points and want to learn how to DDOS a site so they can't spout their idiocy.

Thankfully the Argus site is virtually unreadable due to all the ads, so there's that small crumb of comfort.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Really disingenuous of The Argus to report the hotel refusal as if it was Julie Cattell's fault as the chair with the casting vote. The planning department had already recommended the application for refusal to the committee. In a tied situation it is extremely rare that a chair of the committee with cast a vote going against their officer recommendation.

The Albion shot themselves in the foot somewhat with the fact the stadium as a whole with its sweeping lines would blend in with the landscape, which to be fair it does. The bund is a landscape feature to soften that elevation of the stadium and should have had trees planted on it as part of the conditions, but these were not done. The application was then for a modern very box like proposal which went against the Ablion's own original concepts for the stadium.

In this case the Albion thought they could bypass the planners concerns and recommendations to refuse and simply win the votes of councillors at committee. That is a tough call on a sensitive site adjacent to the National Park.

This. Club took their eye off the ball on that one. All they had to do was submit a design that complemented the sweeping lines of the stadium, or at least gave a nod in that direction, and the hotel would be up and running by now. Instead they submitted a design for a squat ugly box. Presumably they assumed the sweetener of including a cancer unit as part of the proposal would cause any objections to be swept aside. And in a less sensitively located site they'd probably be right.

 

[Super Steve Earle]

The design of the hotel was drab, grey and unimaginative. Turned down with good reason.

 

[Easy 10]

I've never actually seen the design of the hotel they submitted the planning application for. Is it knocking around online anywhere ?

Was it something like this ?

 

[Stat Brother]

I've never actually seen the design of the hotel they submitted the planning application for. Is it knocking around online anywhere ?

Was it something like this ?

From memory you'll be surprised to learn you actually aren't too far from the truth.

 

[Marty___Mcfly]

I've never actually seen the design of the hotel they submitted the planning application for. Is it knocking around online anywhere ?

Was it something like this ?

 

[Easy 10]

View attachment 113149

Blimey, I see what they mean now. What a piece of crap.

Having gone balls-deep in designing such an iconic, aesthetically pleasing stadium, I'm amazed they came up with such a shabby generic bolt-on shoebox design for the adjacent hotel. It totally spoils the look of the eastern side of the stadium.

It's like plonking a 1970's prefab next to the Taj Mahal.

 

[portlock seagull]

Blimey, I see what they mean now. What a piece of crap.

Having gone balls-deep in designing such an iconic, aesthetically pleasing stadium, I'm amazed they came up with such a shabby generic bolt-on shoebox design for the adjacent hotel. It totally spoils the look of the eastern side of the stadium.

It's like plonking a 1970's prefab next to the Taj Mahal.

It’s very ‘soviet’ isn’t it?!

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I've always said it would make a good location for a new larger supporters bar that all ages can access.

The hotel seemed a good idea. And it was only turned down because it looked crap. And it did look crap imho. Why not re-explore this again? They could turn over areas for what they like on match-days eg bars, Corp hospitality etc.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Hotel = Great idea.

Next to Uni, and train station. Brilliant.

Design = Awful.

Deserved to get turned down.