Lewes DC reaction

[Lord Bracknell]

Interesting to hear Peter Gardiner (LDC's Lead Councillor for Planning) on SCR just now. He seems to recognise that this issue that has divided LDC from the rest of us is where to strike the balance between protecting the countryside and other matters. LDC take one view, Hazel Blears takes another.

I'm heartened by my signature ...

“If there is one principle of planning law more firmly settled than any other it is that matters of planning judgment are within the exclusive province of the ... Secretary of State”.

 

[The Oldman]

I thought Peter Gardiner sounded quite reasonable in explaining that you canot expect an instant reaction from a public body over a letter of such length. He also seemed to give Lewes a way out by saying it wast their duty to try to protect the South Downs but would work with the Albion as they had no quarrel with the club.


Norman baker on SCR next. Will he stick with his comment of yesterday that whatever the decision it's the final one?

 

[Buzzer]

Has anyone emailed Bath Liberal Democrats to inform a certain councillor that we're back in business?

 

[The Oldman]

To be fair Norman Baker is sticking with it's the end and would advice Lewes so. His gut feeling is that Lewes will not appeal but someone else might

 

[Lord Bracknell]

To be fair Norman Baker is sticking with it's the end and would advice Lewes so. His gut feeling is that Lewes will not appeal but someone else might

Setting aside the fact that "not liking the decision and the fact that Hazel Blears' judgment is different from ours" is no grounds for an appeal, "someone else" simply doesn't have the funds to finance an appeal.

 

[balloonboy]

Has anyone emailed Bath Liberal Democrats to inform a certain councillor that we're back in business?

Come September 5th, and assuming no appeal, I will be round his house, park outside and give a massive two-fingered salute to the b@stard.

 

[Dover]

I have just been watching the BBC Sout East Today news, and this is thier leading story. What was amazining yest again, is the claim of "area of outstanding natural beauty," whith the charming echo of heavy traffic in the background.

If that is one of their arguments, Queens Park Road, must therefore be an area of outstanding beauty. After all it's far quieter.

 

[supaseagull]

It's the last bit which mentions the car park being in a built up area of Rotterdam that I'm worried about - do you think they'll notice?

 

[Yorkie]

Not with my council tax money, LDC and the 4999 others who signed a petition in just a week.
Think about that whilst you're poring over the clauses.

 

[DTES]

I'm heartened by my signature ...

“If there is one principle of planning law more firmly settled than any other it is that matters of planning judgment are within the exclusive province of the ... Secretary of State”.

I'm assuming the "..." doesn't replace "neighbouring council and certainly not the"?

 

[Lady Bracknell]

The LDC press release has just come my way:

Date: Tuesday 24 July 2007
Media: 881

Countryside loses out in Falmer decision

Lewes District Council is disappointed that the Secretary of State has not taken a stronger approach to the protection of the countryside. In granting Brighton and Hove Football Club planning permission for a 22,500 seater stadium in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) she agrees that the proposal would cause "considerable harm to the AONB", but says that "harmful impact to a degree is acceptable".

Councillor Peter Gardiner, Lead Member for Planning at Lewes District Council said
"The way in which planning policies have been interpreted by the Secretary of State show that environmental protection within Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty is weakened by this decision. Only time will tell if such a decision paves the way for further major intrusive development on the South Downs. The stadium will erode the important gap of open countryside between the built up area of Brighton and Falmer village, and that goes against the planning policies that are in force".

We need time to consider and take advice on the contents of the Secretary of State's letter that we received today. We expect to decide on a position within the next ten working days. We have always accepted that the Football Club should have a new home, but we said that there were more suitable options than Falmer".

Ends/

Note to editors:

We challenged John Prescott's original decision in 2005 because it was fundamentally flawed on several important points. John Prescott admitted he had got it wrong and his decision was quashed in the High Court. The costs of the challenge to quash the decision will be paid by the Government, not by local taxpayers.

 

[Cantona's Flying Dropkick]

I have just been watching the BBC Sout East Today news, and this is thier leading story. What was amazining yest again, is the claim of "area of outstanding natural beauty," whith the charming echo of heavy traffic in the background.

If that is one of their arguments, Queens Park Road, must therefore be an area of outstanding beauty. After all it's far quieter.

And they always stand near the pond!

Why don't they go to the place where it actually is going to be built?

 

[supaseagull]

The LDC press release has just come my way:

We have always accepted that the Football Club should have a new home, but we said that there were more suitable options than Falmer".

and that my friends is what Lewes and all the other anti-Falmer protestors have failed to grasp.

There are NO other suitable options WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF BRIGHTON & HOVE.

The second Public Enquiry ruled that there were NO SUITABLE OPTIONS WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF BRIGHTON & HOVE and that is why they came to the conclusion that FALMER IS THE ONLY SITE SUITABLE for the development of a COMMUNITY stadium designed primarily for the use of a football club representing the city of Brighton & Hove, not Lewes, Upper Beeding, Newhaven or anywhere else in the United Kingdom.

 

[Peteinblack]

Lewes DC are disappointed at the decision and will take advice and state their position in 10 days time

Here's some advice LDC - admit defeat gracefully and stop wasting everyone's time and money.

:yahoo::yahoo::yahoo::yahoo::yahoo:

 

[tedebear]

Note to editors:

We challenged John Prescott's original decision in 2005 because it was fundamentally flawed on several important points. John Prescott admitted he had got it wrong and his decision was quashed in the High Court. The costs of the challenge to quash the decision will be paid by the Government, not by local taxpayers.

Dear LDC, So who will pay if you object to this one? Lots of love, Ted...

 

[supaseagull]

Dear LDC, So who will pay if you object to this one? Lots of love, Ted...

Give you a clue...Begins with a "T" ends in "R" and has the word "axpaye" in the middle!

 

[DTES]

Give you a clue...Begins with a "T" ends in "R" and has the word "axpaye" in the middle!

I thought you were going to say it has "edebea" in the middle! Leave tede alone, she was only making a point!

 

[Screaming J]

I thought Peter Gardiner sounded quite reasonable in explaining that you canot expect an instant reaction from a public body over a letter of such length. He also seemed to give Lewes a way out by saying it wast their duty to try to protect the South Downs but would work with the Albion as they had no quarrel with the club.

No quarrel with the club?

NO QUARREL WITH THE CLUB?

NO QUARREL WITH THE CLUB ?

Then what in Christ's name does he think Lewes DC have been doing for the last 5 years.

Give me strength.

 

[tedebear]

I thought you were going to say it has "edebea" in the middle! Leave tede alone, she was only making a point!

Like I'm that rich anyhow

 

[Pondicherry]

Given that Falmer Parish Council wanted to re-open the public inquiry two months ago, they are probably "someone else" with money. Also given the length and detail of the minister's decision, I would be surprised if a good lawyer (or for that matter a bad one) could not find aspects of it they could use to at least convince FPC they could appeal. After all, where has most of the money spent by both sides during this drawn out process gone.