Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Just what legal grounds COULD Falmer parish council have to appeal?
- Thread starter GUNTER
- Start date
Eastleigh Northstander
Member
None i hope! They have dragged this on far too long already
Lawro's Lip
New member
Bet they wait the full six weeks to finally say they won't appeal.
withdeanwombat
Well-known member
On the grounds that they have better quality people in Falmer who will not sing rude songs and piddle in the duckpond..........unless the rugger team is doing well,of course.
bhaexpress
New member
They'll spend their money trying to find a typo in the decision.
BUTTERBALL
East Stand Brighton Boyz
Celebrations at the club's offices remained muted this morning in the knowledge opponents had weeks to try to block the development.
Paul Samrah, the chairman of the Falmer for All campaign, said: "We're absolutely delighted. This has been a long time coming but it the correct decision in my view.
"We've had two more years of wrangling and now we just implore our opponents for no more appeals.
"As time has gone on the arguments against the stadium have dissipated. Let's build the stadium and make it something the whole of Sussex can be proud of.
"There are no champagne corks popping just yet. Our celebrations are tempered in the knowledge our opponents have 42 days to appeal.
Paul Samrah, the chairman of the Falmer for All campaign, said: "We're absolutely delighted. This has been a long time coming but it the correct decision in my view.
"We've had two more years of wrangling and now we just implore our opponents for no more appeals.
"As time has gone on the arguments against the stadium have dissipated. Let's build the stadium and make it something the whole of Sussex can be proud of.
"There are no champagne corks popping just yet. Our celebrations are tempered in the knowledge our opponents have 42 days to appeal.
As someone has already pointed out on teh 'Hazel Blears' Letter' thread, the South East Coast Ambulance Service is wrongly referred to as the 'South East Ambulance Service' or somesuch.
Seems serious enough to me - go to work lawyer types!
Seems serious enough to me - go to work lawyer types!
Exactly. The last Planning Appliction was quashed on a technicality, you can bet your bottom dollar that the LDC/FPC legal bods are trawling through the latest set of documents (at their Council Taxpayer's expense) to find the tiniest flaw. This non-existent Ambulance service might be enough for them to launch an appeal.
Perhaps it would be, but I'm sure that if they did appeal on this the Judge would simply chuck out their appeal as common sense would make it clear what was meant in reality.
Probably not a great idea if anyone does spot an obscure valid reason for an appeal to post it here. Best keep quiet for 6 weeks :falmerspi
Seagull Stew
Well-known member
I believe they could appeal on the grounds of the bottom picture of this page:
http://www.seagulls.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/StadiumDetail/0,,10433~1077728,00.html
Clearly this does not accurately represent the true design of the stadium in the original application!
http://www.seagulls.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/StadiumDetail/0,,10433~1077728,00.html
Clearly this does not accurately represent the true design of the stadium in the original application!
piranha
New member
You may want to check out this where LDC say they'll decide in the next 10 days. So maybe not that long to wait after all:
http://www.lewes.gov.uk/council/11443.asp
To save you the bother of clicking, read:
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".
http://www.lewes.gov.uk/council/11443.asp
To save you the bother of clicking, read:
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".
Gazwag
5 millionth post poster
Isnt it a case of having to wait the full six weeks anyway even if all parties say the wont go any further
Oh dear, same old story...
"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." - untrue
"Only time will tell if such a decision paves the way for further major intrusive development on the South Downs. " - wild speculation
"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". - I think untrue. Fairly certain that strategic gaps have no weight in planning law.
"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." - ok, I'm sure you will take your time
"We have always accepted that the Football Club should have a new home," - hmmm...
" but we said that there were more suitable options than Falmer". - but no one else including the secretary of state can identify them.
Storer68
New member
Errrrrr am I worng but isn't the stadium OUTSIDE the AONB now................
pornomagboy
wake me up before you gogo who needs potter when
it is, the plans where drawn up a while back
Lord Bracknell
On fire
It's certainly outside the area that the National Park Inquiry Inspector recommends should be given long-term protection.
But Hazel Blears' decision letter makes it clear that "as no final decision on designation has yet been taken, and as the precise boundary may yet be subject to change, the Secretary of State has afforded the proposed National Park only limited weight as a material consideration in the determination of these applications".
Marty McFly
Seagulls Over Canada
I'm not so sure about that. Under the reasoning for rejecting Shoreham Airport/New Monks farm she mentions "a major development at this site would seriously erode the strategic gap within which the land lies."
But saying that, is there really a strategic gap at Falmer?
Fourteenth Eye
Face for Radio
The Government has said yes ....TWICE. You would like to think that they would have got the message by now