Topic categories:

The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon

You need to be signed in to respond to this topic

First pagePrevious page

Displaying 181 to 193 of 193 posts

Page 13 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 ... 9 10 11 12 13
No actionNo action
193 posts:
Order:    

Dreamtime
Perth Western Australia
All posts by this member
181 of 193  Thu 8th Nov 2018 8:58am  
Member: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:3377

On 8th Nov 2018 5:30am, JohnnieWalker said: Good work, guys! PS - Dreamtime - perhaps the Lady Godiva routine would work all over again! Basically it's the same scenario - us against the rich Lord, isn't it? Wouldn't be hard to find a speedway bike for her, instead of a horse, …….. but they are a bugger to ride side-saddle! Any volunteers? Edited by member, 8th Nov 2018 5:35 am
JW, be careful what you wish for Lol Lol Lol
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
Midland Red
Cherwell
All posts by this member
Thread starter
182 of 193  Thu 8th Nov 2018 9:20am  
Moderator: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:5467

You offering, Dream? Lol
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
Dreamtime
Perth Western Australia
All posts by this member
183 of 193  Thu 8th Nov 2018 10:55am  
Member: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:3377

Not to be wearing a pink body skin, but maybe draped in the Bees flag . . . and Dr Who to transport me back about 50yrs in the Tardis. We want to get more supporters in, MR, not scare them orrrrrf! Roll eyes Lol I can't bear to imagine the sight!
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
Midland Red
Cherwell
All posts by this member
Thread starter
184 of 193  Mon 19th Nov 2018 8:25pm  
Moderator: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:5467

Updated Newsletter from the Campaign Group PLANNING consultants acting for Brandon Estates have been forced into the correction of a key paragraph of evidence from their most recent submission to Rugby Council. Framptons recently completed a ‘Needs Assessment’ which seeks to make the case that Brandon Stadium is surplus to requirements in line with National Planning Policy. In addition to the error-strewn report itself, an item in the covering letter accompanying the document raised major concerns, and has now been amended. Those who attended our recent Public Meeting will be aware that Jeremy Heaver spoke briefly on behalf of Coventry Racing Club Ltd during the question and answer session. Mr Heaver stated that having had sight of the most recent documentation, Coventry Racing Club had contacted Framptons to inform them they would take action against them should it not be withdrawn. Co-incidentally, the day after the Public Meeting, Coventry Racing Club received an apology from Framptons together with a correction to paragraph 1.15 in their covering letter. The paragraph concerned initially read: “In mid-2016 negotiations between the applicant and Coventry Racing Club Ltd ensued with respect to agreeing a new lease for 2017 onwards.” Framptons have now stated there was an error in the instructions received, and that the paragraph should have referred to mid-2016 negotiations with Coventry Speedway Ltd and not Coventry Racing Club Ltd. We find this single retraction peculiar for a number of reasons, not least because the relevant paragraph appears in a section of the report entirely devoted to (and headed with) Coventry Racing Club Ltd. It goes on to cast doubt over the financial position of Coventry Racing Club Ltd in a bid to explain why a lease deal was not agreed, and subsequently why they stopped running stock car events ‘on tour’ after four such meetings in 2017. Coventry Racing Club Ltd have always disputed the notion that they were given the opportunity to agree a lease for 2017 and beyond, an issue we pointed out in our initial response to the planning application, and the correction of this paragraph has a major effect on the timeline of what followed later, leading up to the forced closure of the stadium. Given that the Turley Report (focusing on viability) also contains the following paragraph, we assume that this should now also be amended: 1.13 …New lease/licence terms were offered to Coventry Speedway Limited (owners of Coventry Bees speedway team and racing licence holder) and Coventry Racing Club Limited (owners of Coventry Stox stock car/banger racing and associated licence holder) in mid-late 2016. Any possible action taken by Coventry Racing Club Ltd against Framptons is not a matter for our concern, but we will be further scrutinising both the original and most recent documents to ascertain which items could now be further challenged as a result of this correction, and we will make the appropriate representations. It is clear that if it is now accepted that Coventry Racing Club Ltd were in fact prevented from continuing as leaseholders, it totally invalidates sections of reports which state that no parties were willing to continue staging sporting events at the stadium beyond 2016, leading to the false narrative which states the stadium closed because no credible businesses wished to operate there. This notwithstanding, we already have evidence of third parties who wished to discuss operating at Brandon in 2017/18, and the response they received from the owners, via Howell & Co Solicitors, under the guise of ‘willing engagement.’ The actual content of the ‘needs assessment’ – which embarrassingly attempts to argue that there is suitable alternative provision for both Coventry Bees speedway and stock car racing elsewhere - is another matter entirely, and one which was covered in great detail at the Public Meeting. Members of the Campaign Group met with the Principle Planning Officer last week to take her through our concerns, and we have been reassured by Rugby Council’s pledge to seek independent, expert advice in order to investigate all documents to ensure that decisions are made in full knowledge of the facts. We will be happy to co-operate with whoever is appointed to lead this enquiry, should that be required, and are absolutely confident that statements made in our representations are indisputable. Brandon Estates, Framptons and Howell & Co should be aware that they cannot, and will not, be allowed to make statements which fail to present a fully accurate account of events both before and after the closure – and whose analysis of viability and alternative provision are both wholly unsatisfactory. We have already shown that we have extensive documentary and photographic evidence to dispute, or dispel, many of their claims, several of which are made with no apparent understanding of the much-loved sports they are scandalously attempting to permanently evict from the area. We will continue to challenge, in the strongest possible terms, any document which indicates there is no requirement for speedway and stock car racing in the Coventry/Rugby area, and that no parties are interested in operating.
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
Midland Red
Cherwell
All posts by this member
Thread starter
185 of 193  Sat 22nd Dec 2018 10:04pm  
Moderator: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:5467

THE Save Coventry Speedway & Stox Campaign Group send their compliments of the festive season to all supporters. As we head towards a third year in which our sports will be absent from their rightful place, we want to assure everyone that our determination to see them return remains as high as ever. There have been few formal developments since the Public Meeting in early November, but we have remained active and can confirm Rugby Council are now in receipt of even more information to counter the statements made by Framptons on behalf of Brandon Estates. The Planning Application for Brandon Stadium was submitted in January 2018 but a date has still yet to be set for it to be taken to committee. This will not take place until the completion of the government Inspector’s Report into the Rugby Local Plan (which we believe is imminent), or until the Council have received specialist sporting advice regarding the application itself and the myriad of responses opposing it. We remain totally convinced that the Planning Application is intrinsically flawed as it fails to satisfy the criteria required for the development of established sporting venues under National Planning Policy Framework. Framptons were required to submit further information making the case that there is no ongoing need for the two sports to be operating at Brandon (or in the immediate area). This was finally submitted after a five-month delay, and we made our views very clear both in our response to the Council and in our presentation at the Public Meeting. Since then, it has been confirmed that there will be no Coventry Speedway team competing next season, giving a final answer to the ludicrous claims that the club was perfectly well accommodated at Leicester. The stock car analysis was equally controversial, and we have submitted aerial photographs of all of the venues which Framptons claim could be alternatives to Brandon, which totally disproves their ‘desk-top analysis’ which contains very little in the way of actual evidence. Additionally, if you were at the Public Meeting you will remember the case of Perry Barr, which is listed in Framptons’ covering letter to their Needs Analysis as a possible alternative venue, on the basis that it stages “similar kinds of uses.” That statement is incredible enough if you know Perry Barr, but even more extraordinarily the stadium is then included in a list of current, active stock car venues during the content of the Needs Analysis, leading to a completely inaccurate mathematical exercise over the total number of venues. In addition to the responses which had already been submitted pointing out the fallacies of these statements, we have now been able to submit the actual planning documentation from Birmingham City Council granting permission for speedway to be staged at the stadium from 2007. This makes it quite clear that no motorsport with the exception of speedway can be staged at the venue. In our view it is totally unacceptable that a Planning Application and associated documents seeking to destroy an iconic, successful and viable sporting venue, where there is a clear case of ongoing need, can be so disgracefully deficient. There have been numerous other responses to the Needs Assessment, including from both the speedway (BSPA) and stock car (BRISCA and BSCDA) governing bodies, all of which highlight the inaccuracies and untruths contained within, and stress the importance of Brandon to their sports. Framptons have also been forced to withdraw a section of the report relating to Coventry Racing Club and the negotiations which did or did not take place in 2016, and this also has an impact on the Turley (viability) report submitted in January which made the same incorrect assertion. It is the belief of the Campaign Group that both the original Planning Application and the subsequent Needs Assessment documents are absolutely riddled with inaccurate, misleading and untruthful statements, and we have therefore considered making a formal complaint to the Royal Town Planning Institute under Sections 11 (Accuracy) and 12 (Errors and mis-statements) of their Ethics and Professional Standards Advice document. We have decided however, as Rugby Council have committed to the appointment of an independent body to look into the various claims and our response to those claims, we will defer a decision until the independent body completes their investigation. We already have meetings confirmed for the early part of the New Year where we will be seeking assurances over the exact process going forward. We will be ready for any situation and can assure Framptons and Brandon Estates that our opposition will only increase until they do the right thing and agree that the sports should be allowed to return. We do ask all supporters to stay as positive as possible – we have a huge amount of firm evidence in our favour, and we will keep fighting for as long as it takes. The Campaign Group wishes you all a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, and please be assured we will update you as soon as there is further news. *FOLLOWING the news that Coventry Bees would not be racing in 2019, we were asked by the Coventry Telegraph on December 4 to provide a statement. As only half of that statement was printed, we now reproduce it in full: We stated when the Bees were accepted into the National League, running at Leicester, that we could only offer our full support if we could be convinced that this was part of a genuine plan for the club to eventually return to its rightful location. It is patently obvious from the most recent planning documentation that the developers were happy to regard Leicester as an appropriate long-term solution, in an attempt to absolve them of any responsibility to provide an alternative in the Coventry/Rugby area should they receive permission to build on Brandon. Although the club has issued no statement, the Bees have not been included in the list of National League starters for 2019, which will be largely down to the poor attendances and associated losses suffered this year – none of which comes as any surprise, and does not lessen the demand for speedway or stock car racing in the area. This totally invalidates the representations of Framptons, who argued in their initial application in January that Leicester was “better suited to its use as a speedway stadium for a number of reasons including its accessibility...” and their subsequent remarks claiming that alternative provision for the previous speedway use at Brandon had been satisfactorily made, along with their inaccurate analysis of alternative stadia for both sports. The failure of the Coventry Bees project at Leicester merely highlights the totally unsatisfactory nature of that solution, and the clear ongoing need for the club to be operating in the Coventry/Rugby area. The Planning Application continues to directly contradict the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework with regard to sports facilities, and the developers must not be permitted to proceed on that basis. The absence of Coventry from competition in 2019 in no way changes that position.
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
Midland Red
Cherwell
All posts by this member
Thread starter
186 of 193  Thu 17th Jan 2019 4:39pm  
Moderator: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:5467

January update from The Save Coventry Speedway & Stox Campaign Group: OUR first meeting of 2019 saw members of the Campaign Group back at Rugby Council offices on January 9. Attending the meeting were the Leader of Rugby Council Michael Stokes; the new Head of Growth and Investment Stephanie Chettle-Gibrat; the Development and Enforcement Manager Nick Freer; and the Principal Planning Officer dealing with the Brandon Estates application, Erica Buchanan. One of the main reasons for the meeting was to take the officers through our latest document to be submitted. Given the volume of material which has been generated over the last two years, and especially since the planning application, we have pulled much of it together – and also included new information – into a single document summarising the errors and untruths contained within the planning material submitted by Framptons. Unsurprisingly, this is once again a hefty document! Those who were present at our Public Meeting last November will recall Cllr Stokes’ announcement that an independent consultant was to be appointed, at considerable expense to the Council, in order to go through the material from all sides and provide an informed response from within the sporting sector. We warmly welcomed that news as we are 100 per cent confident that the information we have submitted, which is accompanied by clear and indisputable evidence rather than vague jargon, will stand up to examination. Supporters are reminded that Framptons/Brandon Estates are attempting to make the case that Brandon Stadium closed down due to the non-viability of running speedway and stock cars (which had successfully run together for over 60 years); and that sufficient alternative venues exist elsewhere in the Midlands to ensure there is no ongoing need for either a return to Brandon or for an alternative site to be provided in the Coventry/Rugby area. We believe their application and follow-up material are totally non-compliant with National Planning Policy Framework regarding open space, sport and recreation facilities, and we welcome the fact that they will be subject to outside scrutiny. The independent consultant has now been appointed, and we already have a meeting scheduled with him for later this month. As to the question of when the planning application will go to committee, we can say that it is not currently imminent for two reasons. Firstly, it clearly cannot happen until the independent consultant has completed his report, and although this extends the time period we see the appointment as a positive step and proof of how seriously the Council take the matter. Secondly, the final Local Plan report from the Government Inspector had not been received as of last Wednesday, and another pledge from Cllr Stokes at the Public Meeting was that the application would not be heard until this has been completed. So although we do appreciate the frustration that this process has so far taken nearly a year from the submission of the application, we urge supporters to be patient – and we can assure them that we have options in mind to react to several potential scenarios in future. Once again our thanks are due to the senior members of the Council for making the time to meet with us, and fully engaging with what we had to say. As ever, we will endeavour to update supporters whenever possible as matters develop over the coming weeks and months.
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
Midland Red
Cherwell
All posts by this member
Thread starter
187 of 193  Tue 14th May 2019 1:29pm  
Moderator: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:5467

Too large to transcribe, so here's a link to "Latest News - Rugby Local Plan" on the Save Coventry Speedway and Stox website. This sounds encouraging Thumbs up
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
Midland Red
Cherwell
All posts by this member
Thread starter
188 of 193  Wed 15th May 2019 9:14am  
Moderator: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:5467

Recent video showing the state of the stadium Angry
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
argon
New Milton & Tiptoe
All posts by this member
189 of 193  Wed 15th May 2019 10:37am  
Member: Joined Jun 2016  Total posts:253

Distressing, all in the false name of progress, or is it greed.
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
JohnnieWalker
Bonny Hills, Australia
All posts by this member
190 of 193  Fri 24th May 2019 9:31pm  
Member: Joined Jul 2011  Total posts:295

Says it all, doesn't it!
True Blue Coventry Kid

The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
Midland Red
Cherwell
All posts by this member
Thread starter
191 of 193  Sat 8th Jun 2019 11:50am  
Moderator: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:5467

"Campaigners confident development of Brandon Stadium could be thrown out" - report
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
Midland Red
Cherwell
All posts by this member
Thread starter
192 of 193  Thu 8th Aug 2019 10:25pm  
Moderator: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:5467

Latest update from The Save Coventry Speedway & Stox Campaign Group: WE are conscious that it is some time since we last delivered an update on the fight to bring speedway and stock car racing back to the Coventry area. From the beginning of the process we resolved that we would never provide ‘news’ purely for the sake of giving false hope to the many thousands of people who have been affected by the forced closure of Brandon Stadium. Therefore we must be totally upfront in saying that the majority of 2019 so far has been spent in a frustrating waiting game, as we have absolutely no control over the timescale of this process - despite our continuing efforts to look to move things forward. What we can assure everyone is that our determination level has not dropped, and we have still been involved in many meetings and conversations aimed at bringing an end to this outrageous situation. Those present at the Public Meeting last November will remember the then leader of Rugby Council, Michael Stokes, announcing that an independent report was to be commissioned to assess the fundamental differences between the Brandon Estates planning application (submitted in January 2018) and associated further documentation, and our own responses. During that public meeting we presented a brief critique of that documentation, exposing many errors, inaccuracies and untruths in the planning application, and naturally we provided extensive responses to the Council, leaving no doubt that the Brandon Estates/Framptons bid to build on Brandon is fundamentally deficient for numerous reasons. The independent consultant was appointed in January of this year – we met him later that month – and his draft report was received by the Council on July 8. Naturally we urgently await sight of that report, which is not yet in the public domain, as the contents will have a major bearing on how we proceed. Rugby Council have always been clear that the planning application itself would not be taken to committee until after the completion of the Rugby Local Plan – which, as expected, firmed-up protection for sports venues such as Brandon, in addition to the unequivocal Neighbourhood Plan reaction, backing the restoration of the celebrated stadium to its former use – and the receipt of the independent report. Our current indications are that the application may well be heard in November 2019, and we will keep everyone posted on that. Despite the fact that it is nearly three years now since the bikes and cars were evicted from their rightful home, we urge everyone to remain as positive as possible and make sure it’s known that the vast majority of the public are still firmly against the developers’ plans. They are attempting to destroy nearly 100 years of sporting heritage, and a venue which was and would still be successful, viable and needed – purely for self-interest and financial gain arising from a completely speculative purchase. They must not be allowed to succeed.
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon
Midland Red
Cherwell
All posts by this member
Thread starter
193 of 193  Tue 1st Oct 2019 1:44pm  
Moderator: Joined Jan 2010  Total posts:5467

INDEPENDENT REPORT BOOSTS CAMPAIGN MAJOR NEWS this morning! Independent report confirms application to build on Brandon is NOT compliant with National Planning Policy Framework. Full details: AN independent report into the planning application on Brandon Stadium has firmly concluded that National Planning Policy Framework guidelines have NOT been met by the developers. Consultants WYG have reported to Rugby Borough Council after a thorough examination of documents both from representatives of the developers, and from the Save Coventry Speedway & Stock Car Campaign Group, who are seeking to secure the return of both sports to the area after the forced closure of the stadium at the end of the 2016 season. The developers submitted their planning application in January 2018, which at the time omitted a Sports Needs Assessment (SNA), which followed in September 2018. This sought to prove that the stadium was not viable, and that there was no ongoing need for a replacement, as suitable alternative provision existed elsewhere (for speedway, with Coventry operating at Leicester, and for stock cars at other venues within a 70-mile radius). The Campaign Group submitted extensive documentation to expose numerous untruths and inaccuracies throughout the planning material, and at a Public Meeting in November 2018 the former Leader of Rugby Council Michael Stokes announced the independent review would be commissioned prior to the Planning Committee hearing. The consultants met with all interested parties including representatives of the developers, the Campaign Group and governing bodies of both speedway and stock car racing earlier this year. Their report was issued to the developers and the Campaign Group in advance of going into the public domain on Monday September 30. A reminder that paragraph 97 of National Planning Policy Framework states that existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless: a) an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements [NOTE: This is the section the developers are attempting to use to justify their plans]; or b) 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 c) the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the benefits of which clearly outweigh the loss of the current or former use. Key points to emerge from the report: • WYG stress the view of the government Planning Inspector regarding the Local Plan, in that when making a decision the Council need to “start from the basis of safeguarding provision, in line with the general policy for sport and recreation buildings.” Key criteria for decision making are evidence of “need, viability and alternative provision.” • In the overview of Need, WYG state that the SNA “falls short in certain areas, and there are inaccuracies… which do impact on the findings and the narrative set out by the applicant.” They also point out that the motorsports bodies were not consulted as part of the SNA, which is described as “an omission, and would have painted a different picture in terms of needs and outcomes” – as the governing bodies were supportive of the role of Brandon, its importance to the sports and the impact of its loss. • Regarding the developers’ list of existing speedway and stock car venues, WYG observed that “there are inaccuracies within the detail of the audit, which make the quantitative claims within the SNA less robust” – and that a number of facilities listed do not provide ‘like for like’ replacements as claimed, for either sport. • Regarding the condition of the stadium at the point of closure, WYG state: “The stadium was evidently fit for purpose… Furthermore, whilst investment would have been required, there is no evidence that this was over and above the level expected of a venue of its age and type, and nothing that would have pre-empted its closure on quality grounds.” They go on to say: “In the context of motorsport stadiums Brandon could reasonably be considered to be a quality venue, with no major investment required which might threaten its operation.” They note the “special significance” and long-term history of Brandon in terms of staging major events, and state: “Brandon was unquestionably still a significant motorsport venue up to its demise, and was more than just a local track.” • The final note on the quality of the stadium confirms that “the alternatives put forward in the SNA are not ‘fit for purpose’ and fall significantly short of providing the same qualitative experience as delivered at Brandon for motorsports.” • WYG have questioned the developers’ selection of a 70-mile radius for suitable alternative venues, and also backed up the Campaign Group’s response of the unsuitability of stadiums within that range, stating that “the number of genuinely accessible facilities is therefore much reduced from the case set out in the SNA.” They also stress the good, central location of Brandon – and conclude: “Despite there being no agreed accessibility catchments, it is difficult to argue that reduced provision located significant distance away… is acceptable in terms of access and passing the ANOG [Assessing Needs and Opportunities Guide] accessibility test.” • WYG deal with the re-location of Coventry Bees to Leicester, racing in the National League, in 2018, describing it as “a significant part of the applicant’s SNA case, and was put forward to demonstrate there were suitable alternative provision to justify the loss of Brandon.” However, “the reality was that the re-location was never like-for-like, the Coventry team that transferred did so to compete in the bottom division… which was a very different offering and team. It was only ever done on a short-term basis, with no long-term commitment put in place. The re-location did not work, lasting only a short time and Coventry Bees no longer race.” • WYG also point out that “stock car racing has not successfully re-located”, and also refer to the recent unfortunate closure of Stoke – which in itself never provided a ‘like for like’ re-location. • The conclusion of the Availability section states that “Lack of availability has had a clear impact in terms of speedway ending and stock car activity being curtailed. There is and has not been adequate availability of suitable alternative provision and re-location opportunities to allow the sports to continue.” • In summary, WYG state: “We are not convinced that the case has been made that Coventry Stadium is surplus to requirements as argued by the applicant.” • The developers have argued that the cost of re-instating Brandon as at 2017 was £3.73 million. WYG have noted the work of the Campaign Group, who feel the cost would be far less due to the support gained from local businesses, and the tremendous reaction from volunteers willing to give their time to return the stadium to its former glory. • WYG note that the final aspect to be explored, as set out by the Inspector, is to consider alternative provision, ie. a replacement stadium – confirming once again that the previous re-location strategy did not work. • The authors recognise that “there is evident widespread support for motorsports in the area, as a legacy of Coventry Stadium, and real capacity and a groundswell that could drive a replacement proposition. This is an important ingredient, which should not be under-estimated.” • Whilst WYG state firmly that the current stadium cannot be deemed surplus, they do question whether a re-opening would be deliverable – and so they suggest that “a replacement option presents the next step, without a stalemate position being reached. This therefore needs to be explored… The history and support behind the Coventry Stadium could suggest there may be potential to deliver an alternative.” • The section concludes with the statement that “An alternative provision strategy would require developers to accept the principle of meeting paragraph 97 b) and all parties commit to explore this route.” • However, the developers are attempting to secure permission via paragraph 97 a) [showing the venue to be surplus to requirements] – and the clear conclusion from WYG is that: “We do not believe this test has been met sufficient for Coventry Stadium to be deemed surplus to requirements.” Both the developers and the Campaign Group will have the opportunity to comment to the Planning Officer on the report, and Rugby Council have confirmed the application will not go to Planning Committee as previously expected in November. Campaign Group spokesman Jeff Davies said: “We have waited for this report for ten months, since the Public Meeting last year, and we are very pleased that consultants WYG have concurred with almost all of the points made in our representations to Rugby Council. “At no time during the last three years have we believed the fight to save Brandon was a lost cause. “Speedway and stock car racing are great family sports, with speedway having been staged there for 90 years, and both sports are vitally important to the area. “WYG consultants recommend that the Campaign Group are involved in any discussions to meet Paragraph 97b, should the developers agree this could be a way forward. “We are absolutely open to be involved in any discussions with the developers and Rugby Council which are aimed at finding a solution in order to bring about the return of speedway and stock car racing to the area for future generations to enjoy.” The full report from WYG is available to read via the Rugby Borough Council Planning Portal. Visit https://planning.agileapplications.co.uk/rugby/search-applications/ and type Coventry Stadium into the Location section. Select the second application (R18/0186), and from the Documents tab scroll down to ‘Miscellaneous Documents’ and select the Independent Review document.
The future of Coventry Stadium, Brandon

You need to be signed in to respond to this topic

First pagePrevious page

Displaying 181 to 193 of 193 posts

Page 13 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 ... 9 10 11 12 13
No actionNo action

Previous (older) topic

Useless Information
|

Next (newer) topic

Coventry food & drink
View similar topics in the Sport, Music and Leisure category
 
Home | Forum index | Forum stats | Forum help | Log out | About me | My music
Top of the page
HTML5
1,698,057

Website & counter by Rob Orland © 2019

Load time: 103ms