News RSS Feed


Councillors on the attack over football stadium plans

PITCHSIDE ASPECT: An artist’s impression of the view from the pitch looking towards the proposed Worcester City FC stadium. PITCHSIDE ASPECT: An artist’s impression of the view from the pitch looking towards the proposed Worcester City FC stadium.

PLANS for a new football stadium for Worcester City Football Club need to go back to the drawing board, say parish councillors.

Warndon parish councillor Ted Holloway said his three concerns over plans for the proposed new football stadium off Nunnery Way was the entrance site, the lack of parking provisions and the location of the newly proposed pedestrian crossing.

Plans have been submitted for a signal controlled pedestrian crossing on Nunnery Way.

Worcester City Council is now waiting for a response from Worcestershire County Council over its views on the crossing and to see if it will suggest any alternatives.

As we reported back in 2009, the original plans for the stadium did not include proposals for a crossing across the busy bypass.

A crossing controlled by traffic lights was originally ruled out by the county council because it would interrupt traffic flow on the road, which is subject to the national speed limit of 70mph. A pedestrian bridge over Nunnery Way was deemed too expensive by developers and was objected to by police on safety grounds At a meeting of the parish council on Monday night, Councillor Holloway said the proposed location of the crossing was “dangerous” and also raised concerns over the 90-degree angle of the entrance to the site.

He was also left baffled by “inadequate” plans for just 179 parking spaces for the 5,400-seater stadium.

Coun Holloway said: “The parking provision is inadequate. As for the comment made by police that people walk to football matches – not out at Nunnery Way.

“I honestly think that someone needs to go back to the drawing board.

“I think we should point these points out.

“The entrance is in the wrong place, the crossing is dangerous, positioned too close to the traffic island, and there is inadequate parking on the site.

“These three issues are those that concern us the most.”

The plans submitted to Worcester City Council by St Modwen are for a new sports stadium to house Worcester City Football Club, offices, a new health and fitness centre, vehicle showrooms, a pub, restaurant and hotel.

Julie Rossiter, senior asset manager for St Modwen, said: “The site access proposals provide adequate and safe vehicular access to the site, and in addition, a safety audit has demonstrated there are no safety concerns over the provision of a signal controlled ‘at grade’ pedestrian crossing on Nunnery Way. The total parking provision for the site is 743 spaces.

“The revised plans address concerns raised by planning officers. We are continuing to have ongoing dialogue with the local authority, Worcester City Football Club and other stakeholders regarding the planning application.”

Comments(6)

Niko80 says...
6:27pm Wed 6 Jul 11

It would seem that the City Council are anti this development FULL STOP! They should perhaps take a GOOD look at some of the 'other' developments they have approved, Pedestrian crossings near roundabouts, there are many, infact on that road at Whittington, Parking Provision; Doesn't the Warriors development have inadaquate parking? Even NOW after the additions cars are still parked around the Motorway island with Supporters ambling across this busy junction without Pedestrian Crossings........All seems that WCC has got a hidden agenda me thinks...Pftt

Samboy says...
10:39pm Wed 6 Jul 11

i have had occasion to write to the EN once before complaining about the Council's attitude to Worcester City F.C. That was around 1970 when the Council were throwing money and support at the County Cricket Club as they strove to buy New Road from the Cathedral. In the years between nothing has changed, in those 40 years the council have portrayed a negative, if not aggressive, attitude to any move by the 'City'. I admit that some of the attempted moves were questionable to say the least so it was not all one-sided but it does seem that the approach is always No No No.

Samboy says...
10:39pm Wed 6 Jul 11

i have had occasion to write to the EN once before complaining about the Council's attitude to Worcester City F.C. That was around 1970 when the Council were throwing money and support at the County Cricket Club as they strove to buy New Road from the Cathedral. In the years between nothing has changed, in those 40 years the council have portrayed a negative, if not aggressive, attitude to any move by the 'City'. I admit that some of the attempted moves were questionable to say the least so it was not all one-sided but it does seem that the approach is always No No No.

fairly sober says...
7:29pm Thu 7 Jul 11

Is all this a bit academic if there is no money to pay for a new ground ?

The_Real_Brooksider says...
9:46am Fri 15 Jul 11

The City council have always bent over backwards to help the football club, and they have no obligation to do so. Firstly, the land at Nunnery Way has continually been allocated in the Local Plan for WCFC, despite pressures to re-allocate it for employment land. Secondly, the City Council approved the planning application for the previous B&Q backed scheme, only for this to be overruled by Inspector Richardson at the public inquiry. If WCC was anti WCFC they could have easily reallocated Nuunery Way for other usage at the re-drafting of the Local Plan. Its not WCC's fault if St. Modwen keep presenting proposals which fall way outside that which is allowed within the planning remit. Remember this application is now for a 75% mixed retail park, and a 25% football ground, which again Richardson rejected when it was a 50/50 split! If WCFC had presented a planning application for a small self-contained ground at Nunnery Way, or a larger staium complex with community sports focussed enabling development, WCC would have consented, but WCFC have never done that.

Andrew Guy says...
2:00pm Wed 27 Jul 11

I write to correct something in the last post:
-
The B&Q scheme was not approved by the City Council. Indeed, the B&Q scheme was never submitted to the City Council as a planning application.
The B&Q scheme (dubbed "CLT30") was simply a proposed amendment to the the Local Plan, but HM Planning Inspector Clive Richardson rejected it at Public Inquiry.
-
Property Week (10/04/04), printed:
-
"...Clive Richardson, inspector at the local plan inquiry, practically laughed the scheme out of court,writing in his report that the scale of retail warehousing was so great that 'several objectors have made the point that it is difficult to identify what is the primary land use and what is the enabling development. The retail uses are seen by many as riding piggy-back on the stadium proposal, while others go further and describe the scheme as a reckless "slash and burn" approach to land use.'
"The inspector agreed with the objectors: the report recommends the proposals be refused on seven grounds, including scale, policy implications, transport and inadequate financial detail."

Local Businesses

Most popular