City Council back Falmer

[Lord Bracknell]

What really amazes me is these people are charged with spending our money ( well the people of Lewes's money) on such things as education, policing, roads, etc etc and yet, one of the two big things they have on going, this and the incinerator, they manage to totally screw up their one big chance.

Is this not a case of the useless leading the incompetant?

Fortunately, the good citizens of East Sussex as a whole saw fit some years ago to dump the Lib Dem County Council administration in favour of something different.

It's the Tories who control education, policing and roads in Lewes. The Lib Dem District Council are in charge of rubbish collection.

And planning.

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

Just because it is designed for other sports doesn't mean that they will be played there. In China they have public executions in football stadiums, you could argue that Falmer is also ideally suited to that purpose, however as a civilised nation we abandoned that barbaric practice decades ago.

I like that.... I vote For Archer followed by Bellotti and finished with Baker... stoning for De Vecchi I think

 

[Curious Orange]

Gosh




Press release:

http://www.seagullsparty.org/prelease-19feb07.pdf


The LDC documents can now be found on the Seagulls Party website:

http://www.seagullsparty.org/ldc-transport1.pdf

http://www.seagullsparty.org/ldc-transport2.pdf

http://www.seagullsparty.org/ldc-transport3.pdf


The particular paragraph in the LDC report that the Seagulls Party is highlighting can be found, on page 52, at:

http://www.seagullsparty.org/ldc-transport2.pdf

How on earth did they get hold of those I wonder?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Unfortunately it's been necessary for the press to be advised that, for some reason, the council have removed the original transport documents from their website.

I wonder if they'll ask some questions.

 

[The Auditor]

Unfortunately it's been necessary for the press to be advised that, for some reason, the council have removed the original transport documents from their website.

I wonder if they'll ask some questions.

lets hope they get really stuck into it.....LDC should withdraw their case given that its a little creative !!

 

[The Wookiee]

Wake me up when its built

 

[Curious Orange]

Unfortunately it's been necessary for the press to be advised that, for some reason, the council have removed the original transport documents from their website.

I wonder if they'll ask some questions.

What, something along the lines of "so why did you remove those documents from your website, are you trying to hide something? Because I have a copy of those documents and there are some interesting comments in them, would you like to elaborate further upon them? You weren't trying to 'spin' the results of your transport consultants analysis were you, because it seems self evident that they indicated several junctions in Brighton were likely to be quite busy on match days, grid-locked in fact?"

 

[Gwylan]

Good work Ed. I'm sure Private Eye would be interested in that cock-up - it's just the sort of thing that would appeal to them (and forget any notion that they're favourable to Lewes, they'll go for any council caught in something as incompetent as that).

 

[Woodchip]

Cracking one Ed. You really are a star for the Falmer cause.

 

[The Large One]

Fortunately, the good citizens of East Sussex as a whole saw fit some years ago to dump the Lib Dem County Council administration in favour of something different.

It's the Tories who control education, policing and roads in Lewes. The Lib Dem District Council are in charge of rubbish collection.

And planning.

Apparently, the two departments may well merge into one.

It will now be 'Rubbish Planning & Collection'.

 

[Easy 10]

Apparently, the two departments may well merge into one.

It will now be 'Rubbish Planning & Collection'.

Well when it comes to "Rubbish Planning", I think LDC wrote the book.

 

[Caveman]

The Lib Dem District Council are in charge of rubbish collection.

And planning.

Whats the difference there then?

 

[The Clown of Pevensey Bay]

Good work Ed. I'm sure Private Eye would be interested in that cock-up - it's just the sort of thing that would appeal to them (and forget any notion that they're favourable to Lewes, they'll go for any council caught in something as incompetent as that).

I think your faith in the Rotten Boroughs column is misplaced. It might as well be written by David Neighbour himself.

Excellent press release, though.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Excellent press release, though.

Credit where it is due to the comic jester from a seaside community near Eastbourne who came up with the idea that talking about sexing up a dodgy dossier might ring a bell with certain Lewes Lib Dems.

 

[ac gull]

In the unfortunate circumstance that the documents were later removed by LDC from their website; it appears I still have copies downloaded from yesterday still on my pc!

If anyone would like me to e-mail them copies - for them to send to their MP's re signing EDM 882 - please send me a PM - have them as both word files and pdf - whatever you prefer - if any of you can't read pdf files

Am sure we can get a few Seagulls Party campaign slogans out of this as well!!!

 

[Lord Bracknell]

... or get them from here:-

http://www.seagullsparty.org/ldc-transport1.pdf
http://www.seagullsparty.org/ldc-transport2.pdf
http://www.seagullsparty.org/ldc-transport3.pdf

 

[eastlondonseagull]

.....and this is what Lewes DC have submitted
(Full details http://www.lewes.gov.uk/environment/10570.asp)



5 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS

5.1 In respect of the matters upon which the Secretary of State invited representations in her letter of 20 November 2006, the response from Lewes District Council may be summarised as follows.

5.2 Almost the whole of the site lies outside the built-up area of Brighton as identified in the adopted Brighton and Hove Local Plan.(Matter (a)).

5.3 The relevant development plan policies for such a location are those relating to the countryside and the AONB, where major new development will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances and where the applicant can demonstrate that there will be no adverse impact on the landscape and the environment.

5.4 The proposed development manifestly fails these tests.

5.5 The one specific development plan policy � SR23 of the BHLP � applies to only part of the application site, and relates to an area too small to accommodate the totality of building proposed in the application itself.

5.6 As the majority of the application site lies within a designated AONB, then material weight must thus be given, in assessing planning applications for major development in such areas, to national policy advice in PPS7, now strengthened by the UK having become a signatory to the European Landscape Convention. (Matter (b)).

5.7 Regard must also be had to the relevant development plan policies relating to AONB locations, all of which militate against major developments unless an exceptional and overriding case can be made out .

5.8 The First Secretary of State himself concluded that the proposed development at Falmer would not be consistent with such policies.

5.9 The overall benefits arising from the Falmer site have been over-stated by the Football Club, and would apply in any event to any site within the City where a new stadium were to be located.

5.10 Equally, the regeneration benefits � which are secondary to the main purpose of the application before the Secretary of State � would bring greater benefit to the Sheepcote Valley area.

5.11 There is no national or regional need for the development in the planning application, i.e. a football stadium.

5.12 The community benefits are extremely limited, and again would arise wherever a new stadium were built.

5.13 The benefits arising are so local and non-Falmer dependent as to not constitute sufficiently strong or exceptional reasons for allowing major development in an AONB.

5.14 The First Secretary of State�s test as to whether, in relation to the alternative sites, there was a reasonable prospect of planning permission being granted, was flawed. (Matter (c)).

5.15 It is clear from the evidence that, not only did the First Secretary of State apply the incorrect test in law, but that � even if his test was the right one � there ARE now reasonable prospects of permission being granted for the Sheepcote Valley site.

5.16 The First Secretary of State was inconsistent in applying his test: the Falmer site is identified as having a wide range of fundamental, national policy, disadvantages, whereas the Sheepcote Valley site had only one local adverse impact (accessibility) which the new evidence now indicates is capable of resolution.

5.17 There have been major new changes in circumstance since the First Secretary of State�s decision, particularly the identification by Brighton and Hove City Council and others of the coastal belt of the City as a hub for major, international level, developments and proposals for a Rapid Transit system to facilitate access between Brighton Station and the various sites involved.(Matter (d)).

5.18 The Sheepcote Valley site is in very close proximity to the eastern end of the hub, and thus would benefit from the ability of football fans to undertake multi-purpose visits to Brighton, thereby spreading the load in terms of transport accessibility.

5.19 In conclusion, Lewes District Council formally requests the Secretary of State to agree with both the First Inspector�s recommendations and these representations (together with all of the other evidence submitted by Lewes District Council), and refuse the planning applications accordingly.

CUNTS

 

[SeagullTim]

LDC -
City Council -

 

[Gwylan]

I think your faith in the Rotten Boroughs column is misplaced. It might as well be written by David Neighbour himself.

I've been reading Private Eye for 35 years and in that time they've gone after Labour councils, Tory ones and even the Lib Dems.

They love crooked councils, but next best are incompetent ones: and they have no party political axe to grind.

 

[The Clown of Pevensey Bay]

But the author of Rotten Boroughs has always criticised Brighton & Hove ("Skidrow-on-Sea"). I don't think he's ever going to side with them on Falmer.