Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

City Council back Falmer and rubbish LDC



Good stuff!

The full documentation sent to Ruth Kelly can be found here:
http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=c1001178


Falmer Community Stadium

On 20 November 2006, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Ruth Kelly) invited parties to make further representations to enable her to reconsider the applications by Brighton & Hove Albion to build a community Stadium at Falmer.

Representations were submitted in February 2007 by the city council, the football club, Lewes District Council, Falmer Parish Council and several other bodies and individuals. The city council's representations are under "February 2007 Representations" below.

In March 2007 the Secretary of State invited comments on the representations made by other parties. The city council's comments are set out under the four headings below which refer to the four issues identified in the Secretary of State's letter of November 2006.

a) the location of the site in relation to the built up area of Brighton. These comments relate to points raised by Lewes DC and the South Downs Joint Committee. They primarily cover the interpretation of policies in the Brighton & Hove Local Plan and the Brighton Hove and East Sussex Structure Plan.

b) the effect on the planning applications of Planning Policy Statement 7 (development in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty). These comments concern two main issues the interpretation of PPS7 and the regeneration arguments. The city council believes that Lewes DC and Natural England have, in their representations, misinterpreted PPS7 and the council's comments set out what it believes to be the correct interpretation. The council then comments on the regeneration arguments which have been made by Lewes DC and Falmer PC.

c) the merits of alternative sites, but in particular Sheepcote Valley and its accessibility. Lewes DC submitted as part of its representation in February a Transport Assessment which purported to demonstrate that Sheepcote Valley is a suitable alternative site and that it can be accessed without disruption to the public transport and highway network. The council commissioned Colin Buchanan and Partners Ltd to comment on this. Their report Appendix C1 identifies a number of serious flaws which the council believes are sufficient to make a proposed statium at Sheepcote Valley unworkable for transport reasons.

d) any new matters or changes of circumstances which are material. This section responds to comments on the proposed designation of the South Downs National Park and other issues relating to a proposed stadium at Sheepcote Valley.

History

The application for the development was first considered by the council's Planning Applications Sub-Committee at a special meeting on 12 June 2002. The sub-committee endorsed the building of the new 22,000 seat community stadium on the north-eastern ease of the city adjacent to Brighton University. The site is just off the A27 Trunk Road and close to Falmer railway station about 6km from the city centre.

The first public inquiry into the stadium application was completed in October 2003. Following this inquiry, the Secretary of State concluded that he needed further evidence concerning the suitability of alternative sites. A second inquiry took place in early 2005 and considered seven alternative sites, concluding that none was suitable for a new stadium.

The scheme

The centrepiece of the scheme is a multi-purpose all seater stadium, with a capacity of 22,374 seats. The stadium will also incorporate:

a banqueting and conference facility
a nursery school/crèche
720 square metres of teaching space
1200 square metres of office space.

As well as football matches, the stadium is also designed for other sports such as rugby and hockey, and music concerts, conferences and exhibitions. The proposed building of curved lines clad in glazing and aluminium panelling, would be sunk into the land through the use of 'cut and fill' techniques, thus reducing its visual impact.

Other components of the scheme are:

a transport interchange/coach park to the east of the stadium linked to the concourse around the stadium - this would provide facilities for Park and Ride buses operating from Brighton Racecourse, Mill Road and Mithras House, as well as scheduled services and home and away fans' coaches
some 1200 spaces at Sussex University to be used by spectators on match days
a 1000 space car park at Falmer High School in connection for use only on main event days
a new subway under the A27
alterations to the A27/A270 road junction - including a new flyover -for access to the car park at Falmer High School
a new link road through the southern part of Stanmer Park to the car parks at Sussex University
a combined footpath/cycleway along the northern boundary of the Falmer School/Brighton University campus to the stadium
a new footbridge over the railway at Falmer Station
220 cycle spaces
 




The Argus version:-

Countdown to Falmer decision
By Andy Dickenson


Falmer has been backed by what councillors hope will be their "final word" on the controversial stadium proposal.

Brighton and Hove City Council has submitted its support for Albion's new stadium to Local Government Secretary Ruth Kelly.

Campaigners said it was now a time of "fingers crossed" that Ms Kelly says yes to the Falmer ground.

She is reviewing the plans after the original approval by John Prescott in 2005 was quashed.

All parties involved in the last public inquiry into the Seagull's controversial development have been asked by the government to submit comments on each other's views.

Alan McCarthy, chief executive of the council, said: "It's not a simple black and white issue but our interpretation of the planning guidelines is that there is an overwhelming case for Falmer.

"We're still backing the club and hope this can be our final word on this long-running planning saga.

"And once permission is granted the club can move on to sorting out the finances needed to make this development happen."

The council said regeneration benefits of the scheme would include a £13 million economic boost annually, 300 construction jobs, and 300 permanent jobs.

But plans for Falmer have been opposed by the parish council, Lewes District Council and conservation groups because of its proximity to the South Downs, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Mr McCarthy said this "need not be a fatal flaw".

While conceding the stadium site was partly in the current AONB, the council said that designation was likely to be abandoned when a South Downs National Park is finally created.

Ms Kelly has also asked for views on the accessibility of Sheepcote Valley as an alternative location.

But the council said the evidence produced on this by Lewes District Council was seriously flawed.

It included assumptions people could walk to Sheepcote Valley from the centre of the city in 25 minutes, whereas the true time would be "double that".

Paul Samrah, chairman of the Falmer For All campaign, said every supporter was now crossing their fingers Ms Kelly would be swayed by Brighton and Hove's response.

He asked Gordon Brown, during his visit to the city as part of the festival last week, if he was in favour of the new ground.

Mr Samrah said: "I said we've been homeless since the very week he became Chancellor and that hopefully Ruth Kelly would give him a very positive start to his era as Prime Minister.

"He said he had been a football fan all his life, supporting Raith Rovers, and he looked forward to a favourable response when he next came to the city."

Coun Gill Mitchell, acting leader of the Labour Group, said: "A very clear case has been made for the economic, sporting and cultural benefits to the city that a stadium at Falmer would bring.

"Further examination of the Sheepcote Valley option still shows that transport links remain a huge obstacle."

The councilís submission can be read at www.brighton-hove.gov.uk.
 






Green Cross Code Man

Wunt be druv
Mar 30, 2006
20,532
Eastbourne
Thanks for that Lord Bracknell.
Perhaps we'll all sleep a little easier then in a months time or whenever Ruth Kelly gives her judgement.
 






Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
72,219
Living In a Box
Good news and helpful to the cause, come on Ruth do the right thing
 


Everest

Me
Jul 5, 2003
20,741
Southwick
She'll make the right decision in the end, then tell us that we'd have to wait 5 days for it.
 




DIFFBROOK

Really Up the Junction
Feb 3, 2005
2,267
Yorkshire
LDC consultants report on Sheepcoat Valley was well and truly rubbished. Basically, LDC have said to their consultants 'dont care how you do it, but make Sheepcoat Valley look a viable alternative'. LDC consultants have taken the money and because the case was almost non existant have had to produce a report that on occasions plucks figs and responses out of thin air and with no source material.

If I were a resident of LDC I really would be fuming at the amount of money that LDC continue to waste.

I appreciate that Brightons consultanta equally have been told what to write, but at least it contains facts and not spurious assumptions. The fact also that Brighton & Hove City Council are the sole planning authority for Sheepcoat and that if a stadium was planned for Sheepcoat, then planning officials would be advised to reject it on transport infrastructre issues.

I'm more optimistic that Sheepcoat Valley has been demolished as an alternative. If this turns out to be true, then surely there is no need for a third inquiry as all other potential sites have been looked at...to death. It will be a straight choice, yes/no to Falmer. With the Govt previously saying that they recognise the need for a new stadium, then it has to be a yes.

Have I been on the happy pills today?
 


Napper

Well-known member
Jul 9, 2003
24,325
Sussex
It sounds positive.

Will LDC appeal again though should we get the yes.

Also , can we appeal if its no ?
 


portlock seagull

Well-known member
Jul 28, 2003
17,609
Dougal said:
It sounds positive.

Will LDC appeal again though should we get the yes.

Also , can we appeal if its no ?

I'd like to know the answers to these too - Lord B please?
 




sparkie

Well-known member
Jul 17, 2003
13,082
Hove
Either side can appeal, I think, but it depends on whether they have legal grounds to appeal, which can only be known once the decision letter is released and it's exact wording available...

And you can't appeal simply because you do not like or agree with the decision, nor can you appeal if you don't agree with the Governments position on a matter of opinion ( ie whether something is or isn't in the national interest, for example )
 
Last edited:


Lewesian Seagull

Active member
Jul 13, 2003
258
Lewes
Dougal said:
It sounds positive.

Will LDC appeal again though should we get the yes.

Also , can we appeal if its no ?

I had a rather " heated discussion" with Jim Daly (a leading Lib Dem LDC councillor) on my doorstep in the run up to the Lewes election.

He is actually, as a person, not too bad a bloke.

He promised me that if Ruth Kelly gives us a yes, LDC will not pursue the matter any further.
He even went as far to say that this is not just his opinion, but an actual decision that has already been taken by LDC
 


Lady Bracknell

Handbag at Dawn
Jul 5, 2003
4,514
The Metropolis
Yes, either side can appeal and I'm sure if the decision came back wrong, we could expect an appeal.

As for LDC, you never know what to believe. During the local election campaign, dear old Jim "Deputy Dawg" Daly (one of the Lib Dems in the ward I contested) assured several Seagulls Party supporters that the council wouldn't appeal a "Yes" decision. But then he also claimed that the last appeal wasn't his fault either. Instead, it was that nasty Ann de Vecchi who had to bear all the blame. Which, despite my personal opinion of the Fragrant Leader of the Council, is too glib a get-out cause.

With Neighbour & Pepper off the Council and the election results across the district making the Lib Dems a tad uneasy, it'd be nice to be confident that they won't appeal again. I'd also like to believe what he told Lewesian Seagull about the decision already having been made.

But I still don't trust them enough to be 100% confident.
 
Last edited:




Scoffers

Well-known member
Jan 13, 2004
6,868
Burgess Hill
Lewesian Seagull said:
I had a rather " heated discussion" with Jim Daly (a leading Lib Dem LDC councillor) on my doorstep in the run up to the Lewes election.

He is actually, as a person, not too bad a bloke.

He promised me that if Ruth Kelly gives us a yes, LDC will not pursue the matter any further.
He even went as far to say that this is not just his opinion, but an actual decision that has already been taken by LDC

Sorry, don't buy that, politicians will say anything to get our votes. I'll believe it when it happens, or doesn't happen !

Call me old fashioned!
 




Arthur

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
8,703
Buxted Harbour
sparkie said:
Either side can appeal, I think, but it depends on whether they have legal grounds to appeal, which can only be known once the decision letter is released and it's exact wording available...

And you can't appeal simply because you do not like or agree with the decision, nor can you appeal if you don't agree with the Governments position on a matter of opinion ( ie whether something is or isn't in the national interest, for example )

And I'm sure they've got 90 days to lodge that appeal and I'm sure they'll wait 89 of days to do so.

Then it'll role on another couple of years blah blah blah.
:yawn: :yawn: :yawn:

I'm sorry but I can't get excited about any news about Falmer now. Whether it be club spin, Argus spin or LDC spin. Until that first sod of earth is moved my feet are firmly grounded.
 


Publius Ovidius

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
46,681
at home
Arthur said:


I'm sorry but I can't get excited about any news about Falmer now. Whether it be club spin, Argus spin or LDC spin. Until that first sod of earth is moved my feet are firmly grounded.

I am with you on this point.

To a certain degree we have seen all this before....." our argument is watertight...everyone agrees with our case" and then 10 odd years later( or however long its been) we are still waiting for a Yes decision.

All I would hope is we dont have the cracking open of champagne bottles again, until we are in and building the thing...then it will be a time to celebrate.
 




The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
Arthur said:
And I'm sure they've got 90 days to lodge that appeal and I'm sure they'll wait 89 of days to do so.

Then it'll role on another couple of years blah blah blah.
Apparently, the magic date we're looking at is August 20 2007, which - it is believed - will be the deadline for appealing the decision, assuming Ruth Kelly doesn't call it back in.
 


Barrel of Fun

Abort, retry, fail
The Large One said:
Apparently, the magic date we're looking at is August 20 2007, which - it is believed - will be the deadline for appealing the decision, assuming Ruth Kelly doesn't call it back in.

Also, assuming that she does not issue the decision earlier than 9th July.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here