Amex hotel proposal will be decided at BHCC Planning Committee 17th February

[El Presidente]

I thought the chair was 1 of the 5 that voted no, and then her vote counted double as it was a tie, but I guess that could be wrong.

It sounds a bit like the joker in It's A Knockout?

#AndHereComeTheBelgians

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

It sounds a bit like the joker in It's A Knockout?



I loved that, Stuart Hall had me in creases

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

I thought the chair was 1 of the 5 that voted no, and then her vote counted double as it was a tie, but I guess that could be wrong.

That's how I saw it; the chairman voted with the officer's recommendation which made it 5-5, then used her casting vote.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Stuart Hall had me

I'm glad he is under lock and key and can never hurt you again. Such an evil brute.

 

[Uter]

It's not going to take a huge amount of effort now to get this through at a second attempt. One abstention basically is the margin they have to shift. A chair on casting vote is highly unlikely to go against an officer recommendation.

So a bit of swallowed pride and some well timed humility on both sides and it will get through with just a few sensible tweaks/considerations

Still have to get it approved by LDC too though don't they? Just because it was close in Brighton & Hove doesn't necessarily mean it will be close in Lewes. I wonder if they will withdraw the current application with LDC?

 

[easynow]

good call, imho. Build it around the back or something.

 

[Hillian1]

That's how I saw it; the chairman voted with the officer's recommendation which made it 5-5, then used her casting vote.

What?

Is this how it works, someone essentially gets 2 votes.

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

View attachment 72447

good call, imho. Build it around the back or something.

Is that a bow and arrow attack

 

[Triggaaar]

What?

Is this how it works, someone essentially gets 2 votes.

Only in the event of a tie, yes, that's usually how it works.

 

[BensGrandad]

Wouldnt it be more democratic if the chair didnt get a vote unless a casting vote is required and relies on giving advice to the committee as to which way to vote.

 

[Giraffe]

Glad it got rejected, the design was horrible. Must do better.

 

[gregbrighton]

Agreed. It was an awful looking design. Surely the architect can come up with something that is in keeping with stadium.

 

[drew]

good call, imho. Build it around the back or something.

Alternatively, drivers should keep their eyes on the road!

 

[Goldstone1976]

I think from memory it's phelim mcafferty who is the other green who wasn't there today.

His alternate has to vote on the facts based on their judgement, not based on how the person their debuting for would have voted.

Thanks... So, it might be possible that the vote would have been 6-4 no today had the absent Green been present. Or not, of course. But the club would be well advised to plan on that basis if there is to be a second application.

 

[Giraffe]

Agreed. It was an awful looking design. Surely the architect can come up with something that is in keeping with stadium.

I think it would be better placed in the North-East corner of Bennetts Field looking back towards the AMEX. It would then be partly hidden by the trees and you would have the car park in the middle for both stadium and hotel. You would also still then have unobstructed views of our lovely stadium.

Seems obvious to me, subject to LDC planning, and there is the rub I suspect.

 

[Pavilionaire]

i agree, bland design, the site desreves better.

 

[Triggaaar]

I think it would be better placed in the North-East corner of Bennetts Field

But the club don't own Bennetts field.

Go on, ask who does, I dare ya.

 

[Hughton]

But the club don't own Bennetts field.

Go on, ask who does, I dare ya.

WHO does?

 

[Triggaaar]

WHO does?

Congratulations, you have qualified to vote on planning applications.

 

[dazzer6666]

To be honest I thought the design was a bit meh.

However, why we ever let these numbskull's talk absolute bollocks about things they haven't a clue about is beyond me.

Agree on both counts. It was excruciating to watch and scary that such important decisions are made on the basis of almost no relevant knowledge and daft assumptions. Chair was always going to vote No.....was obvious she was against it as it stood. Much of the weight of the NOs argument seemed to be more down to how the club had handled it as well as the 'mediocre' design.