Search results

You cannot build a wall directly in front of somebody's front window. Any planning application will be based on the law. The amount of fans we have is as relevant as Sky Blue Sams waist size.

The council owns no share in the retirement village.

Planning applications aren't judged on what a private business might do in the future. If CRFC objected to the building of Earlsdon Park then they had every opportunity to register their objections at the planning phase.

Community activities are held there which any local person over 55 is welcome to attend.

But the BPA would effectively be being built from scratch. Valid planning grounds would be noise and access issues. Depending on how any development would take place, the blocking of natural light could also be an issue.

Well we as fans blindly followed the club and got behind the Ricoh deal and pressed the council to go ahead with building it. I would hope the fans take a more sober approach to it this time. We should be supporting nothing that anyone proposes until it has been explained to us in explicit...

A realistic plan is my concern, which is something I do not see this as being.

Agree about Wasps but highlights a serious point. If they can't make enough out of the Ricoh to repay their debt, how could we possibly make enough out of sharing the much smaller BPA?

Your stadium cuts into the car Park of the retirement village

Been lurking on here for a while, decided to add my thoughts. I work for the organisation that owns the Earlsdon Park Retirement Village behind the BPA. The residents in there would not take this lying down. There is an active and fierce residents association within Earlsdon Park. Make no...