• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

SOL expansion


Weststand said:
Steves got the wrong end of the stick there..theres no plans been submitted - they are indicitive plans within the objection to the sheepfolds development

Ive posted the outline dimension plans on the other thread which are all within the objection
Click to expand...
Reading an earlier post, it is suggested there was a pre application submission on July 25th. Whatever that is.
I don’t believe that was the objection itself but of course it may be part of the overall objection strategy.
 
MadMackem10 said:
I have to say I agree with most of what Copley says here. Other than saying there are no extension plans currently. On a thread that includes extension plans the club have had created :lol:
You must be logged on to see media items
Click to expand...
Not sure why that Johnny smith would care, he doesn't even go to games iirc.
 
joop said:
Reading an earlier post, it is suggested there was a pre application submission on July 25th. Whatever that is.
I don’t believe that was the objection itself but of course it may be part of the overall objection strategy.
Click to expand...
they done that earlier in the year to keep the application valid (from the same time as the north stand)...the plans are a carbon copy of the north but any new formal application with variation will be made if it goes ahead
 
James said:
I've not looked into this in any detail, but I can't see why there would be any legitimate planning reason for officers to recommend refusal of the Sheepfolds proposal, it would be a very straightforward application to assess. The interests of Sunderland AFC aren't it any interest in that respect, especially since expansion plans are purely aspirational at this stage.

Given the political pressure that will now be on the decision however I'd be dumbfounded if a compromise wasn't found. It's quite embarrassing for the club and the council that they've even ended up in this situation. Bizarre.
Click to expand...
Simple solution
Club buys the strip of land and turns it into a pocket park pending development.
It would have been cheaper to do it before the Sheepfolds development plans came out, but hey ho.
 
OldNewtown said:
Simple solution
Club buys the strip of land and turns it into a pocket park pending development.
It would have been cheaper to do it before the Sheepfolds development plans came out, but hey ho.
Click to expand...
I think some posters noted that option was available but the council wanted extortionate amounts for it
 
Weststand said:
they done that earlier in the year to keep the application valid (from the same time as the north stand)...the plans are a carbon copy of the north but any new formal application with variation will be made if it goes ahead
Click to expand...
The detail in the objection of what will be incorporated into the expansion shows it’s more than just a carbon copy of the north stand. There’s clearly been some significant level of design gone into the process.
Granted I’m mixing two topics here.
 
James said:
I've not looked into this in any detail, but I can't see why there would be any legitimate planning reason for officers to recommend refusal of the Sheepfolds proposal, it would be a very straightforward application to assess. The interests of Sunderland AFC aren't it any interest in that respect, especially since expansion plans are purely aspirational at this stage.

Given the political pressure that will now be on the decision however I'd be dumbfounded if a compromise wasn't found. It's quite embarrassing for the club and the council that they've even ended up in this situation. Bizarre.
Click to expand...

Thought so mate, thanks for clarifying and I agree the whole thing is embarrassing. Is this something that could be changed during the planning process, for example, could they retrospectively relocate plots and introduce a buffer zone or would that likely require a new application?

Does the Council have to formally respond to the club, or not? I find it baffling that it's come to this mind. I would have thought this would have all been agreed as part of any pre application consultation.
 
Last edited:
joop said:
The detail in the objection of what will be incorporated into the expansion shows it’s more than just a carbon copy of the north stand. There’s clearly been some significant level of design gone into the process.
Granted I’m mixing two topics here.
Click to expand...
the plans in the planning portal are off 2001...

however the ones yiu see in the objection are to scale to the sheepfolds development outlining the space between the both for this purpose of objection only I would say
 
OldNewtown said:
As would any developer. The Council will be limited as to what they can do as they must get the best value that they can from any land sale.
Click to expand...

But surely compromises can be made if it's for a greater good and helps the club considering it is the heart beat of the City.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top