# Bristol City FC & The £30 million public subsidy



## BlackArab (Nov 4, 2009)

A bit late but I only discovered this tonight. I thought the Evening Post PR was over the top but I've been hearing some tales of skullduggery tonight 

Anyway here's Councillor Charlie Bolton's blog, scroll down to the November 2nd posting.

http://charlie-boltons-southville-blog.blogspot.com/

where's Ian Bone when you need him...


----------



## BlackArab (Nov 4, 2009)

It's gone through: http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news...tion-live/article-1482753-detail/article.html


----------



## strung out (Nov 4, 2009)

yes, been following this on twitter tonight. the housing development at southlands has been refused, but the planning for the stadium itself has been approved. a city director said this week that without the £5.5m from the southlands development, the ground would not be going ahead. i expect lansdown to have to dig deep into his pockets, or possibly the new bristol music arena to be announced on that site in the near future...


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2009)

Ian's fucked off to london, the other half of the duo is on the ball


----------



## BlackArab (Nov 5, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Ian's fucked off to london, the other half of the duo is on the ball



Still trying to get my head round the solid evidence I saw last night of the club seeking to intimidate people exercising their democratic right to examine  the planning process. I hope this all comes out one day but I very much doubt it.


----------



## strung out (Nov 5, 2009)

gary hopkins (lib dem council member) is the first politician to suggest building the new arena next to the city development http://thebristolblogger.wordpress.com/2009/11/02/say-yes-say-no-say-what-you-like/#comment-20092


----------



## strung out (Nov 5, 2009)

looks like the public subsidy for the development is going to be at least £12.5m, with £5m of land being given to bristol city and £7.5m of s.106 planning gain payments being waived... 

“Six in bits”? Greenbelt grab nodded through with barely a wimper


----------



## 3_D (Nov 7, 2009)

I'm not convinced of the accuracy of these claims about a so-called subsidy, but even if they do turn out to be correct, I don't reckon it would be unreasonable for the local authority to effectively contribute what would be a very small percentage of the total spend, if it enables a project of such huge importance for the people of Bristol to go ahead. 

Other cities have recognised the enormous benefits (social and financial) to their local areas in building new arenas - Hull, Coventry, Milton Keynes, Cardiff and so on - and the local authorities have picked up the tab. In this case the project is being financed by private enterprise to the tune of somewhere between £65m - £100m depending on which reports you read. Bargain for the citizens of Bristol then.

As for talk of a "greenbelt grab", it should be pointed out that the proposed stadium site is NOT GREENBELT, but is in fact an old refuse tip (bounded on two sides by industrial buildings) and therefore brownbelt. It's certainly anything but the rolling countryside the protestors would have us believe. That portion of the application designated for housing (known as 'Southlands') which IS actually greenbelt was declined.

Hopefully this will get the final approval it needs and Bristol will be dragged screaming and kicking into the modern world at last. Especially if Rovers can get their finances together to go ahead with rebuilding the Mem (although preferably without having to include those frickin student rooms!) then we can have two sporting arenas to be proud of.


----------



## BlackArab (Nov 7, 2009)

Huge importance for the people of Bristol? I wouldn't say that, ok I'm Gas but I wouldn't see a good reason for a donation of millions to my club would be justified especially during these economic times. Between both clubs I doubt there's more than 20,000 fans regularly watching in a city of what 400,000?

They are private enterprises and should not be subsidised by council tax payers the vast majority of whom will never step into either ground.

ps I do hope your new stadium improves your catering though.


----------



## 3_D (Nov 7, 2009)

Don't forget the new stadium is about far more than just staging football matches. Colin Sextone in the BEP:



> "The stadium will bring £260m more into the local economy than would otherwise be the case. "That's £13m a year for the next 20 years that will not come into the economy if this development does not happen. "That's why the planning committee's decision is so important, not just for the football club, but for the whole city. We simply can't afford to let an opportunity like this slip through our fingers."
> 
> The draft report by Price Waterhouse Coopers also points to nearly 360 jobs being directly created on the site with potential salaries worth £10m. The economic benefits will not just come from football. They will also be derived from business generated by the stadium's conference and banqueting facilities and the spin-off effect on the hotel  and tourism trade.
> 
> ...


----------



## BlackArab (Nov 8, 2009)

3_D said:


> Don't forget the new stadium is about far more than just staging football matches. Colin Sextone in the BEP:



Any chance of you posting the PWC report, I'd like to see where they've got the figures from. Not that I'm doubting you, I just wouldn't trust anything that comes from a football executives mouth, even ours.


----------



## 3_D (Nov 9, 2009)

No I don't have a link to the report, just quoted from the EP article. Take your point about the potential for spin from the club, but whatever the true figures, it's clear from other cities that have built new stadiums (often at public expense) that developments like this tend to have a big positive impact on the local area. And I would include the Mem in that (if it ever gets rebuilt). 

Remember this report doesn't include the possible impact IF England and Bristol get to host the World Cup, which would be muchos deniros and kudos. Happy days.


----------



## BlackArab (Nov 9, 2009)

3_D said:


> No I don't have a link to the report, just quoted from the EP article. Take your point about the potential for spin from the club, but whatever the true figures, it's clear from other cities that have built new stadiums (often at public expense) that developments like this tend to have a big positive impact on the local area. And I would include the Mem in that (if it ever gets rebuilt).
> 
> Remember this report doesn't include the possible impact IF England and Bristol get to host the World Cup, which would be muchos deniros and kudos. Happy days.



This is the thing you say it's clear other cities have benefitted and some, Cardiff quite clearly have although closing Wembley for rebuilding helped but then these figures are always quotes or projections I would be a lot happier if someone just broke it down before and after.

As for Milton Keynes, tried getting a drink near the stadium the other week, certainly not easy. Swansea, been to the new stadium twice, bussed in and out from the park & ride, certainly didn't see much of the local area. These big new stadia are generally on the edges of town so forget about spending locally and who seriously stays the night in a town for the football unless you're visiting London or a seaside town.

I'm not completely sceptical btw, if we did see World Cup football coming to Bristol, I've got my fingers crossed for watching you're lot getting chased silly by the Dutch again.


----------



## BlackArab (Nov 10, 2009)

BlackArab said:


> This is the thing you say it's clear other cities have benefitted and some, Cardiff quite clearly have although closing Wembley for rebuilding helped but then these figures are always quotes or projections I would be a lot happier if someone just broke it down before and after.



here we go: http://thebristolblogger.wordpress.com/category/merchant-venturers/page/2/

scroll down to July 13


----------



## 3_D (Nov 13, 2009)

Yet the latest report from the England bid team suggests £100mil is an UNDERestimate. Go figure.

BEP again:



> Original council estimates pointed to an injection of £100 million for the local economy if successful but an economic report commissioned by the England bid team claims each candidate host city would benefit to the tune of £150 million.
> 
> Bid chief executive Andy Anson said: "Hosting the FIFA World Cup in England would bring huge benefits to all parts of the country. "Our initial financial study shows it would benefit the country's GDP by £3.2 billion and that locally, those cities hosting matches could expect their local economy to benefit by as much as £150 million each."


----------



## strung out (Nov 13, 2009)

the reality is that england won't get the world cup, though city will benefit from a nice new stadium. which i suspect steve lansdown knows.


----------

