- Jun 7, 2004
- 18,106
- 45,030
From that photo am I the only one that wonders why we didn't use the land that we built the Sainsburys on to enable building 3/4 if not more of the new stadium and avoid any issues with playing away for a season. Clearly there are all sorts of issues with access, planning and the the extra commercial revenue but it doesn't seem...
That was never a realistic option. A major retail operator was always an important part of the master plan (generates ££) and there aren't many other places where a major retail building could go on that site - it needs a street frontage, but it also needs servicing.
If you mean that we should have changed the plan in that direction after the NDP had been granted planning consent, that's not a realistic idea either. It would have required a total redesign to the whole NDP complex, a renegotiation from scratch with Sainsbury's (who were already financially committed), a brand new planning consent, thus re-opening all of the S.106 issues again, fresh site investigations and other tests, because of relocating the stadium itself onto different ground, revised escape and transport arrangements, a different approach to the plaza and the listed buildings...
I could go on and on and on, just off the top of my head. I think it would create a minimum of two years of delay.
Last edited: