Swindon Stadium

[bruno]

Prob cuz I've had a bottle of wine but what's Adam ant got to do with it

[Odds On]

SPOKE to Rosco today and he is adamant that the stadium will be ready for 2017. Structure is of a module type so will not take very long to spring into life as it were.

Post of the year....he's a bigger fool than I gave him credit for!

[Mr S Bear]

People are discussing the proposals for the New Abbey stadium but few people it would appear have looked at the drawings and documents uploaded to the Swindon Council planning department web site.

On March 1st the Highway Department of Swindon Council wrote to the planning department regarding their concerns on the submitted proposals. In brief their concerns were that the drawings showed insufficient information to demonstrate that safe and suitable access for all could be provided to reduce/minimise conflict between all users as well as inadequate car parking facilities. Additionally the Highway Department felt that the proposal did not comply with certain policies of the Swindon Borough Local plan. Due to these concerns the Highway Department recommended that the application be refused. These concerns were passed on to Gaming International Ltd (GIL) and March 31st there was a meeting between all parties and on May 19th GIL wrote back to the planners answering the points raised.

On 26th May and 27th June revised drawings were submitted to the planners. Whilst these revised drawings do appear at first glance to have addressed most of the concerns of the planners/highway engineers. For example the car park layout has been revised to increase the number of spaces provided and there are pedestrian routes through most of the layout which provide separation between pedestrians and vehicles. The major changes are that the overall site layout has been realigned, following comments from the highway department, so that the new stadium does not overlap with the existing stadium, , and the decision has been taken to use modular construction for the main stadium building and the race building.

A closer look at the drawings raises a number of concerns and questions.

The decision to realign the overall site layout to avoid conflict with the existing stadium has resulted in the need for the developer to acquire more land to the east corner of the site as well as rerouting an existing footpath. It is surprising that a fundamental change to the overall design of the development has occurred so late in the design process. Weren’t highways or the planners consulted at an early stage to discuss the sitting of the new stadium in relation to the existing stadium?

What is rather concerning is the fact that the revised overall site plan and acoustic plans show the revised realignment and new car parking layouts the general arrangement plan showing the surfacing proposals and the location plan do not and it is worrying that all parties are not singing from the same hymn sheet and that no one in the project team appears to have checked the drawings before they were submitted or if they did they did it badly.

As mentioned earlier the main stadium has been redesigned to take account of the decision to use modular construction (ie prefabricated units) which I assume was taken to reduce the construction time. What concerns me and I would also worry the planners is firstly that there are no indications on the proposed elevations of the main stadium building what exactly will be the specification of the external materials and their colour but how can the planners hope to make a informed decision on the visual impact of the building if they do not know what the proposed external materials will be or their colour especially as condition 3 of the outline planning permission states “ prior to the commencement of works on site in connection with the development hereby permitted details of the layout, scale, appearance and landscaping of the site should be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority”. Elevations with no notes at all about external materials hardly seem to satisfy this condition.

Secondly whilst the footprint of the stadium building has been revised to suit the change to modular construction resulting in the building now being approx 48m x 30m rather than the previous approx 44m x 27.5m this increase in area is not reflected in the footprint of the stadium building shown on any of the drawings showing the overall development which once again shows a lack of checking by the project team. Will the increased footprint fit on the site without affecting both the car parking layout shown and the associated circulation space.

The floor plans of the main stadium building do show far less information on the proposed internal layout and the intended uses of the space than on the previous submitted drawings. In many ways there look like plans prepared at an early stage of a project for a round table discussion with the client to consider the internal layout rather than a finalised layout for submission to planners for approval. There is no indication of construction of intended materials, no windows are shown at on the ground floor plans but are shown on the elevations, no indication on what the large open spaces at both ground and first floor will be used for. I am assuming that the ground floor will be used as a market area and that the first floor will be used as bar/restaurant/events as previously as shown on the previous set of drawings but the submitted drawings should state this and show an indicative layout as on the earlier drawings.

As on the previous drawings there appears to be no space labelled as a referee’s box. There are two rooms facing the track at either end of the first floor, both accessed from the escape stairs, but either has a room name and additionally assuming that the line half way down the home straight on the master plan is in fact the start finish line then the two possible referees boxes are at either 12m behind the line or 24m in front of it

Whilst there is no longer any car parking on the infield as per the 2007 submitted drawings, and was suggested by the traffic plan submitted in January with its reference to parking within the stadium, the two gates on the inner edge of the track are still shown. You would have thought that in 9 years someone, developer, architect or tenant would have spotted these and removed them.

Also there appears to be some discrepancies between the revised travel plan and the submitted drawings regarding the number of motorcycle and cycle spaces to be provided. The travel plan states 37 motorcycles and 44 cycles whilst the drawings show 20 spaces for both motorcycles and cycles. Additionally the travel plan mentions the provision of a taxi rank for 8 taxis but the drawings only show a taxi drop off point.

Conditions 31 and 32 of the outline planning permission required the main access to the development to be via Lady Lane and access to the pits, kennels, coach and park and ride drop off point was to be via Salzgitter Drive. The drawings submitted in January had only one access to the site, via Lady Lane, and in their letter of March the highway department expressed their concern about the non compliance with the conditions of the outline permission. The revised drawings still only have access to the site via Lady Lane and it is not clear from the uploaded documents if this access arrangement has now received the approval of the highway department and the conditions have been dropped

The updated traffic plan contains a list of voluntarily initiatives and measures proposed by the developer to be introduced during the 2016 season to encourage higher multi occupancy car travel as follows

Structured parking tariff

Discounted parking for multi-occupancy vehicles

Travel options and public transport information to be included in match programme and stadium web site

Potential discounts on admission tickets for people travelling via public transport for occasional fixtures

It would be interesting to know if any of these initiatives has been introduced so far this season.

Whilst I have no doubt that by changing to a modular construction the build time will be greatly reduced my main concern is when will the plans receive approval from the planners – they do appear to be a work in progress rather than the finished product.

 

[damosuzuki]

From what I have read I very much get the impression that gaming international have had numerous stadium plans over the years and to my knowledge none(?) have ever actually materialized. There is a long history here of plans being made, agreements being reached, photos in local papers etc etc but as far as I'm aware the result has always just been housing. Whichever way I look at this, I can't see how GI have any record of success with stadium building, but great success at changing land use to residentil and profiting from it. Am I missing something - because I hope I am.

[mickthemuppet]

My local tennis club of which I am chairman have sold part of our grounds to a building company to build houses on. We are going to have new floodlight courts and a new clubhouse. Part of the agreement was that not one house could be occupied until the new tennis courts were completed..This was laid down as one of the planners stipulations. Why was this not done with the Swindon Stadium. Somebody has slipped up badly here

[MattK]

It was. There is a limit of 200 houses which can be occupied "before contracts are signed" for the construction of the new stadium. The logic being they needed the funds from selling houses to bankroll the stadium build.

 

There are two problems. Firstly "contracts signed" is a very ambiguous term and secondly no-one appears to be policing it!

[Wackie]

Just waiting for GI to come up with their next plan.... They've found an interested partner and are going to scrap the plans for just a stadium and submit new plans for a 'racino'. They'll probably use the drawings they had knocked up for Reading.

[racers and royals]

Just waiting for GI to come up with their next plan.... They've found an interested partner and are going to scrap the plans for just a stadium and submit new plans for a 'racino'. They'll probably use the drawings they had knocked up for Reading.

This new plan will take years in planning. in the meantime someone will open a new casino a mile down the road and goodbye new stadium

[Wackie]

The whole situation has an unfortunate feel of deja vu doesn't it R&R!

[BuxtonTiger]

Regarding Mr Bear's comments, this does appear to be a little pedantic. Surley GI as a reputable company will have done their homework, are you somekind of a planning expert?

[racers and royals]

Regarding Mr Bear's comments, this does appear to be a little pedantic. Surley GI as a reputable company will have done their homework, are you somekind of a planning expert?

Not pedantic at all- his excellent post just highlights what a bunch of incompetents they really are, also reputable and GI do not belong in the same sentence.

Reading Borough council were taken in by them for years- I really hope Swindon council are far more savvy.

[Triple.H.]

Not pedantic at all- his excellent post just highlights what a bunch of incompetents they really are, also reputable and GI do not belong in the same sentence.

Reading Borough council were taken in by them for years- I really hope Swindon council are far more savvy.

I'm not one for rash generalisations

But savvy politicians are few and far between

Politicians who like brown paper bags are far more common.

[arnieg]

Regarding Mr Bear's comments, this does appear to be a little pedantic. Surley GI as a reputable company will have done their homework, are you somekind of a planning expert?

I believe Mr Bear is an architect.

 

And I was surprised to read on the application forms that:

 

a) there was no pre-planning advice,

 

and

 

that GI had no agent listed on the form.

 

With my extensive experience of the planning process I'd say both of those were major warning signals.

[RobMcCaffery]

Regarding Mr Bear's comments, this does appear to be a little pedantic. Surley GI as a reputable company will have done their homework, are you somekind of a planning expert?

GI's reputation has been a subject of debate for some years. There are at least two planning experts contributing to this discussion. No, I'm not one, but I do know how to read documents.

 

Of course 'homework' will have been done, but that does not necessarily mean that there is a genuine will to actually build the stadium.

 

GI have a disturbing record of failed promises which is why people MUST be vigilant this time around before Swindon Robins go the same way as Reading Racers.

Edited July 13, 2016 by rmc

[A ORLOV]

GI's reputation has been a subject of debate for some years. There are at least two planning experts contributing to this discussion. No, I'm not one, but I do know how to read documents.

 

Of course 'homework' will have been done, but that does not necessarily mean that there is a genuine will to actually build the stadium.

 

GI have a disturbing record of failed promises which is why people MUST be vigilant this time around before Swindon Robins go the same way as Reading Racers.

TR and the new Directors, on behalf of Swindon Speedway need to get the Council Planning dept to start doing what they are supposed to do.

The only problem is that Speedway has no say whatsoever in the development or building of the stadium as all they do is rent the present one from Stadia UK, they do not own it.

[A ORLOV]

New reports and letters dated 14 Jul shown on old planning list.

Planning Permission has been refused, AGAIN, based upon the traffic plans and flow.

 

http://pa1.swindon.gov.uk/publicaccess/files/F2577CA609E2261EB6E6306F140E5436/pdf/S_RES_16_0036-HIGHWAYS_COMMENTS_-_11-07-16-541495.pdf

The council will re look at any changes to the issues raised.

If they think that people are going to use the travel plans from the town centre they are living in cloud cuckoo land.

[KIRKYLANE]

I believe Mr Bear is an architect.

 

And I was surprised to read on the application forms that:

 

a) there was no pre-planning advice,

 

and

 

that GI had no agent listed on the form.

 

With my extensive experience of the planning process I'd say both of those were major warning signals.

 

 

Mr Bear works for Bradford Council .. probably the planning dept..

 

IF you saw the car that he drives you would know he can't be an architect !!!!!

[RobMcCaffery]

 

 

Mr Bear works for Bradford Council .. probably the planning dept..

 

IF you saw the car that he drives you would know he can't be an architect !!!!!

Why, does it work?

 

I have a good friend who is a building surveyor and very experienced in planning matters. It's best to fit ear plugs before using the word 'architect' in front of him.

Edited July 14, 2016 by rmc

[arnieg]

Why, does it work?

 

I have a good friend who is a building surveyor and very experienced in planning matters. It's best to fit ear plugs before using the word 'architect' in front of him.

 

Yes, architects like buildings that 'make a statement', usually 'this building looks impressive but isn't fit for purpose. A classic example is the prize winning engineering block at Leicester University by Sterling (he of the prize fame) - the sound carried thru the walls of the lecture theatres, and the building leaked!

[The H Man]

the more this saga rolls on the more I genuinely fear for Swindon Speedway. Gaming International made endless promises around the Reading "Racino" all of which of course were false, excuse after excuse, followed by more false hopes for the fans, then another let down before eventually losing the piece of land that Reading Council had given them and granted FULL Planning permission for them to develop on!

They never fought to extend the lease on Smallmead and I don't think they ever seriously had an intention of building the "Racino"

It sounds a very similar pattern of events 40 miles further West!

Edited July 17, 2016 by The H Man