Royal Elm Park

587 posts
User avatar
Sutekh
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 18386
Joined: 12 Feb 2014 14:05
Location: Undiscovered pyramid somewhere in Egypt

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Sutekh » 20 Apr 2017 14:11

Going before the planning committee next week. Has been recommended for approval with the only objection raised being from Sport England.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Nameless » 20 Apr 2017 14:27

Any details on what Sport England's objection is ?

User avatar
Whore Jackie
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2523
Joined: 09 Feb 2006 13:48
Location: Over 'ere

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Whore Jackie » 20 Apr 2017 14:35

Isn't it the loss of the Dome and outside 3G pitches? I thought that was being mitigated with the proposed move/installation of a new Dome at Forest School?

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Nameless » 20 Apr 2017 14:38

Dome is definitely planned to go to Forest School, which makes sense given the Academy lads are based there.
Loss of a 3G pitch won't kill the deal, easy to put some money the council's way to put a pitch in at Palmer Park or somewhere.

Presumably once this is resolved the issue of Bearwood will be readdressed. We need all weather training facilities anyway, and the lease at Hogwood must be up soon (I've lost track of the actual ownership details for that !)

User avatar
Whore Jackie
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2523
Joined: 09 Feb 2006 13:48
Location: Over 'ere

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Whore Jackie » 20 Apr 2017 14:53

Perhaps it's because the ice rink will be smaller and open for less time than the Christmas one in Forbury Gardens. :?


West Stand Man
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3092
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 08:37
Location: Working my nuts off during early retirement

Re: Royal Elm Park

by West Stand Man » 20 Apr 2017 17:25

Nameless Dome is definitely planned to go to Forest School, which makes sense given the Academy lads are based there.
Loss of a 3G pitch won't kill the deal, easy to put some money the council's way to put a pitch in at Palmer Park or somewhere.

Presumably once this is resolved the issue of Bearwood will be readdressed. We need all weather training facilities anyway, and the lease at Hogwood must be up soon (I've lost track of the actual ownership details for that !)


The club owns Hogwood. They bought it from the MoD.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Nameless » 20 Apr 2017 19:25

mmm, I had thought SJM had bought it privately and leased it to the club.

User avatar
Sutekh
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 18386
Joined: 12 Feb 2014 14:05
Location: Undiscovered pyramid somewhere in Egypt

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Sutekh » 21 Apr 2017 08:13

Nameless Any details on what Sport England's objection is ?


Apparently it's something to do with not being given priority when the likes of Ed Sheeran, Sam Smith and Babymetal gig at the planned conference centre.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Nameless » 21 Apr 2017 08:36

Would we be the first club to have a player perform a concert at their ground ?


User avatar
Whore Jackie
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2523
Joined: 09 Feb 2006 13:48
Location: Over 'ere

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Whore Jackie » 21 Apr 2017 12:43

Nameless mmm, I had thought SJM had bought it privately and leased it to the club.


Yep, that's certainly what happened originally. Not sure who owns it now.

User avatar
RG30
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5919
Joined: 26 Jul 2005 20:42

Re: Royal Elm Park

by RG30 » 21 Apr 2017 23:18

Nameless Any details on what Sport England's objection is ?


Summary: Sport England objects to the proposal because it is not considered to accord with any of the exceptions to Sport England’s Playing Fields Policy or with Paragraph 74 of the NPPF.

10539.4 Miles Away
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1939
Joined: 23 Feb 2007 07:28
Location: Perth

Re: Royal Elm Park

by 10539.4 Miles Away » 22 Apr 2017 04:32

RG30
Nameless Any details on what Sport England's objection is ?


Summary: Sport England objects to the proposal because it is not considered to accord with any of the exceptions to Sport England’s Playing Fields Policy or with Paragraph 74 of the NPPF.


And paragraph 74 of the National Planning Policy Framework says:

Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:
● an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or
● the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or
● the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss.


Which is a fair enough objection I'd say.

User avatar
Sutekh
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 18386
Joined: 12 Feb 2014 14:05
Location: Undiscovered pyramid somewhere in Egypt

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Sutekh » 22 Apr 2017 08:14

10539.4 Miles Away
RG30
Nameless Any details on what Sport England's objection is ?


Summary: Sport England objects to the proposal because it is not considered to accord with any of the exceptions to Sport England’s Playing Fields Policy or with Paragraph 74 of the NPPF.


And paragraph 74 of the National Planning Policy Framework says:

Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:
● an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or
● the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or
● the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss.


Which is a fair enough objection I'd say.


Sounds a pretty weak objection to me. It's largely the car park that's being built on and not a particularly good one in terms of "finish" at that. The only "sporting" loss is the Dome and associated pitches, which are owned by the club (and as far as I know not a public facility), and the Dome is being relocated to the "Academy" at Forest school where it's a better fit for its purpose while the additional pitches will be moved to Bearwood in time.

The only other question is where will the "Garden of Remembrance" be moved to, or will everyone just work round it :?


10539.4 Miles Away
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1939
Joined: 23 Feb 2007 07:28
Location: Perth

Re: Royal Elm Park

by 10539.4 Miles Away » 22 Apr 2017 08:46

Sutekh
10539.4 Miles Away
RG30


And paragraph 74 of the National Planning Policy Framework says:

Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:
● an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or
● the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or
● the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss.


Which is a fair enough objection I'd say.


Sounds a pretty weak objection to me. It's largely the car park that's being built on and not a particularly good one in terms of "finish" at that. The only "sporting" loss is the Dome and associated pitches, which are owned by the club (and as far as I know not a public facility), and the Dome is being relocated to the "Academy" at Forest school where it's a better fit for its purpose while the additional pitches will be moved to Bearwood in time.

The only other question is where will the "Garden of Remembrance" be moved to, or will everyone just work round it :?


As its Sport England that has objected I'm guessing that they are not happy with some aspect of the domes relocation to the school or the eventual move of the other pitches to Bearwood. The dome is available for public hire isnt it? Perhaps thats going to change, again, just guesses. Either way, I think its a fair objection but I can't see it being a deal breaker.

Za Vas
Member
Posts: 238
Joined: 03 Jul 2012 14:33

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Za Vas » 22 Apr 2017 09:15

I wouldn't say the Sport England comments will have much of an effect on things. Especially as Barton Willmore (the Planning Consultant) seem to have provided a fairly in depth response to the objection. Summary:

- The site is largely a car park with the dome being the only playing pitch which will be lost.
- There are 5 'specific circumstances' which Sport England will acknowledge to recommend approval on applications where sporting pitches are lost. BW identified 2 as applicable:
1) Lost pitches will be replaced in the same or better quantity/management.
2) (BW Argued this was only 'potentially' applicable) The proposed development is for a sports facility, the development of which would outweigh the harm caused by the loss of the sports pitch.

Point 2 is argued a lot less than Point 1 but I assume they mean that the overall development of the facility (and sporting facilities specifically within the scheme) will be an overall benefit in sporting terms.

The rest of the response is made up of references to other local sporting pitches that can be hired out by existing users of the dome. As far as I can tell Sport England haven't further responded.

The only major hurdle would be if the Councillors decide to reject it but, given the site will allow for a large number of homes to be built away from the residents of their wards you would have thought this will go through (relatively) easily. They may raise traffic concerns but if Highways/Transport dept haven't raised any objections it will be hard to object on those grounds.

Delboy
Member
Posts: 388
Joined: 27 Nov 2011 10:54

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Delboy » 22 Apr 2017 10:20

I think this will go through, interesting that STAR have withdrawn their car parking objections so must be last minute changes.

Hound
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 24934
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Hound » 22 Apr 2017 10:23

Yeah you can hire the dome currently. Did it for the boy's birthday this year (the changing rooms are comically terrible but the pitch is great)

I imagine the new facility would allow the same, they prob make a bit of money from it

User avatar
genome
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 25180
Joined: 08 Jul 2012 13:29
Location: Universe

Re: Royal Elm Park

by genome » 25 Apr 2017 10:01

http://www.readingchronicle.co.uk/news/ ... _for_fans/

Free travel to games while REP is being built.

Boarding the bus is going to be a clusterfcuk though

User avatar
Silver Fox
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 25702
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 10:02
Location: From the Andes to the indies in my undies

Re: Royal Elm Park

by Silver Fox » 25 Apr 2017 11:20

Ticketless boarding post-match suggests they might do a bit better than they do now

User avatar
royalp-we
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2242
Joined: 30 Sep 2010 11:04

Re: Royal Elm Park

by royalp-we » 25 Apr 2017 11:47

Hardly an exclusive by the Chronic. Free matchday travel has been part of the proposal since day 1.

587 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 117 guests

It is currently 28 Mar 2024 13:30