Lord Bracknell
On fire
Lewes District Council's Planning Committee is meeting on 10 December to consider how to respond to Brighton & Hove City Council's consultation on the Club's latest planning applications for the Falmer Stadium.
First ... The GOOD NEWS! The recommendation of the District Planning Officer is that Lewes District Council raise no objection.
Agenda Item No:
Report No: 238/08
Report Title: Land at Village Way, Falmer - Consultation from Brighton and Hove City Council BH2008/02732
a) A community stadium with accommodation for Class B1 business, educational, conference, club shop merchandise, entertainment and food. Revision to stadium permitted under reference BH2001/02418/FP including the following alterations: Change in roof design and elevational treatment, increase in useable floor area and amendments to use of internal floorspace.
b) Proposed re-contouring of land south of Village Way with chalk and soil arising from excavations required to construct community stadium (as above).
Report To: Planning Applications Committee Date: 10 December 2008
Lead Councillor: Cllr P Gardiner
Ward(s) Affected: Kingston
Report By: Director of Planning and Environmental Services
Contact Officer(s): Steve Howe, Area Team Leader (South)
Purpose of Report:
To consider the consultation from Brighton & Hove City Council
Officers Recommendation(s):
That Brighton and Hove Council be advised that Lewes District Council:
1. Raise no objection to the changes to the stadium itself as proposed in application BH2008/2732. However, the City Council are requested to ensure that the potential use of the increased number of hospitality areas, particularly where used for non-match day functions, are governed by the Travel Plan to limit car travel to the site.
2. Consider the proposal to re-contour land south of Village Way with spoil excavated from the stadium development itself to be preferable, in principle, to disposal off site. However, should Brighton and Hove City Council grant permission, the City Council are urged to ensure that stringent controls are placed on the operation, to include requirements regulating hours of operation, the phasing of work across the land, appropriate restoration and after use of the land with contours to reflect the downland location, adequate land drainage, and implementation of a dust and operational management plan to help control the impact of the works.
Reasons for Recommendations
1 It is considered that the changes to the design of the stadium would be subsumed within the overall development and would not significantly affect its overall appearance and impact on its surroundings, over and above that in the approved scheme.
2 It is considered that the proposal to re-contour the land south of Village Way by the deposit of spoil excavated from the stadium development would, in principle, be preferable to disposal off-site.
But there is some BAD NEWS in the Report. Falmer Parish Council are objecting:-
4.1 Falmer Parish Council objects to the following changes “which are materially different from the 2001 planning application which was approved by the Secretary of State in 2007”.
The Parish Council has made their objection direct to BHCC, and a full copy is attached as Appendix A to this report. In summary, the Parish Council object to the following:
1. Removal of the grass topped bunding at the North and South Stands
Means that the stadium will appear even more visible from all views. The metal roof and block walls dramatically alter the appearance of the stadium and it becomes even more unattractive.
2. The new roof arch
The proposed arch is much less attractive than the butterfly arch and will look like a series of triangular blocks.
3. Disposal of spoil to the south
This was not proposed previously as it would not have been passed. The previously proposed arrangement for disposing of spoil off site by lorry was acceptable to the Secretary of State, and the vehicle movements arising from the process were of no concern to the Parish Council. The proposed re-contouring is not acceptable, as downland is naturally sculpted and not flat, the farmland will be damaged by the disturbance and will become more permeable and prone to leaching and the land will not be as productive as it is now for 5-10 years. Far more dust would be generated by a tipping operation than by lorries removing the spoil from the land.
4. The East Stand
Now given over to the City College rather than offices, employment opportunities which were part of the original application will be lost.
5. Hospitality Lounges
The increase in hospitality areas (increasing from the previous 750 dining covers to either 1905 for dining or 2510 buffet style and from 2 hospitality lounges previously to 8 lounges) would make the stadium a major hospitality venue. Questions arise as to if and how the approved Travel Management Plan would operate for the increased number of hospitality functions which may be anticipated.
And the South Downs Joint Committee are also objecting:-
4.2 Sussex Downs Joint Committee advise that it:
1. Remains of the view that the development would severely harm the AONB.
2. Notes that the Secretary of State granted permission for the original application, and recognises that the decision is a material consideration in the determination of this application, as forming the fall-back position.
3. Objects to the alternative arch (which would be less elegant and less indicative of the downland contours than the approved scheme), changes to the elevation of the West Stand and omission of the chalk bunds to the North and South Stands with the alternative use of a metal roof detracting from the proposal, and the use of blocks for the facades of the North and South Stands instead of a locally distinctive material likely to be available as a waste product on the site.
4. Supports the principle of extension of the energy unit and use of part of the East Stand for the City College instead of commercial offices. Supports the new planted landscape bund and footpath/cycleway to the south of Village Way and additional planting, whilst noting that these are requirements of the approved scheme, rather than specific benefits of the revised proposals.
5. Considers that the proposal to re-contour land to the south of Village Way through disposal of spoil would be preferable to disposal off site. Disposal off–site is estimated to amount to 2500 HGV movements travelling 30km away to a disposal site, amounting to over 807,000 km of lorry travel. A very significant saving in fuel used, CO2 emissions and other problems associated with HGV movements would result, with disposal at Village Way South amounting to 4000 km of HGV movements.
6. Overall, on balance, the Joint Committee objects to the revised application and amendments to the stadium, as indicated in point 3 above.
First ... The GOOD NEWS! The recommendation of the District Planning Officer is that Lewes District Council raise no objection.
Agenda Item No:
Report No: 238/08
Report Title: Land at Village Way, Falmer - Consultation from Brighton and Hove City Council BH2008/02732
a) A community stadium with accommodation for Class B1 business, educational, conference, club shop merchandise, entertainment and food. Revision to stadium permitted under reference BH2001/02418/FP including the following alterations: Change in roof design and elevational treatment, increase in useable floor area and amendments to use of internal floorspace.
b) Proposed re-contouring of land south of Village Way with chalk and soil arising from excavations required to construct community stadium (as above).
Report To: Planning Applications Committee Date: 10 December 2008
Lead Councillor: Cllr P Gardiner
Ward(s) Affected: Kingston
Report By: Director of Planning and Environmental Services
Contact Officer(s): Steve Howe, Area Team Leader (South)
Purpose of Report:
To consider the consultation from Brighton & Hove City Council
Officers Recommendation(s):
That Brighton and Hove Council be advised that Lewes District Council:
1. Raise no objection to the changes to the stadium itself as proposed in application BH2008/2732. However, the City Council are requested to ensure that the potential use of the increased number of hospitality areas, particularly where used for non-match day functions, are governed by the Travel Plan to limit car travel to the site.
2. Consider the proposal to re-contour land south of Village Way with spoil excavated from the stadium development itself to be preferable, in principle, to disposal off site. However, should Brighton and Hove City Council grant permission, the City Council are urged to ensure that stringent controls are placed on the operation, to include requirements regulating hours of operation, the phasing of work across the land, appropriate restoration and after use of the land with contours to reflect the downland location, adequate land drainage, and implementation of a dust and operational management plan to help control the impact of the works.
Reasons for Recommendations
1 It is considered that the changes to the design of the stadium would be subsumed within the overall development and would not significantly affect its overall appearance and impact on its surroundings, over and above that in the approved scheme.
2 It is considered that the proposal to re-contour the land south of Village Way by the deposit of spoil excavated from the stadium development would, in principle, be preferable to disposal off-site.
But there is some BAD NEWS in the Report. Falmer Parish Council are objecting:-
4.1 Falmer Parish Council objects to the following changes “which are materially different from the 2001 planning application which was approved by the Secretary of State in 2007”.
The Parish Council has made their objection direct to BHCC, and a full copy is attached as Appendix A to this report. In summary, the Parish Council object to the following:
1. Removal of the grass topped bunding at the North and South Stands
Means that the stadium will appear even more visible from all views. The metal roof and block walls dramatically alter the appearance of the stadium and it becomes even more unattractive.
2. The new roof arch
The proposed arch is much less attractive than the butterfly arch and will look like a series of triangular blocks.
3. Disposal of spoil to the south
This was not proposed previously as it would not have been passed. The previously proposed arrangement for disposing of spoil off site by lorry was acceptable to the Secretary of State, and the vehicle movements arising from the process were of no concern to the Parish Council. The proposed re-contouring is not acceptable, as downland is naturally sculpted and not flat, the farmland will be damaged by the disturbance and will become more permeable and prone to leaching and the land will not be as productive as it is now for 5-10 years. Far more dust would be generated by a tipping operation than by lorries removing the spoil from the land.
4. The East Stand
Now given over to the City College rather than offices, employment opportunities which were part of the original application will be lost.
5. Hospitality Lounges
The increase in hospitality areas (increasing from the previous 750 dining covers to either 1905 for dining or 2510 buffet style and from 2 hospitality lounges previously to 8 lounges) would make the stadium a major hospitality venue. Questions arise as to if and how the approved Travel Management Plan would operate for the increased number of hospitality functions which may be anticipated.
And the South Downs Joint Committee are also objecting:-
4.2 Sussex Downs Joint Committee advise that it:
1. Remains of the view that the development would severely harm the AONB.
2. Notes that the Secretary of State granted permission for the original application, and recognises that the decision is a material consideration in the determination of this application, as forming the fall-back position.
3. Objects to the alternative arch (which would be less elegant and less indicative of the downland contours than the approved scheme), changes to the elevation of the West Stand and omission of the chalk bunds to the North and South Stands with the alternative use of a metal roof detracting from the proposal, and the use of blocks for the facades of the North and South Stands instead of a locally distinctive material likely to be available as a waste product on the site.
4. Supports the principle of extension of the energy unit and use of part of the East Stand for the City College instead of commercial offices. Supports the new planted landscape bund and footpath/cycleway to the south of Village Way and additional planting, whilst noting that these are requirements of the approved scheme, rather than specific benefits of the revised proposals.
5. Considers that the proposal to re-contour land to the south of Village Way through disposal of spoil would be preferable to disposal off site. Disposal off–site is estimated to amount to 2500 HGV movements travelling 30km away to a disposal site, amounting to over 807,000 km of lorry travel. A very significant saving in fuel used, CO2 emissions and other problems associated with HGV movements would result, with disposal at Village Way South amounting to 4000 km of HGV movements.
6. Overall, on balance, the Joint Committee objects to the revised application and amendments to the stadium, as indicated in point 3 above.
