TWO MORE SITES added to the list of alternatives to Falmer

[Marc]

Thats were tax payers money comes in.

oh yeah good point

 

[perseus]

This is a repeat, just in case, somebody has not read the full implications of what Prescott's office said:

Dear Sir,

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 – SECTION 77
APPLICATIONS BY BRIGHTON AND HOVE ALBION FOOTBALL CLUB LTD
LAND NORTH OF VILLAGE WAY, FALMER
REF NO: BH2001/02418/FP; BH2003/02449/FP; LW/02/1595; LW/031618

1. I refer to the above applications, which have been called in for determination by the First Secretary of State. The applications relate to the erection of a new community football stadium for Brighton & Hove Albion Football Club Ltd with accommodation for Class B1 business, educational, conference, club shop merchandise, entertainment and food and road works, pedestrian and cycle links, coach/bus park and set down area. Shared use of existing car parking space at the University of Sussex and shared use of land for recreation and parking at Falmer High School.

2. The applications were the subject of an inquiry conducted by J R Collyer MRTPI, FRICS. The inquiry opened on 18 February 2003 and closed on 23 October 2003. A copy of the Inspector's report is enclosed.

3. Following the close of the inquiry, the First Secretary of State was aware that progress had been made on the draft Brighton and Hove Local Plan with publication of the Inspector’s Report. He had also received the representations from you, by a letter dated 11 March, on behalf of the applicants. As the matters referred to above related to issues arising since the close of the inquiry, the Secretary of State offered parties the opportunity to comment on the representations in his letter of 19 March 2004. Further letters and comments were circulated under cover of the letters of 26 May and 4 and 23 June 2004. Representations received in response to the letter of 23 June are listed in the attached schedule and are enclosed for information.

4. Following consideration of these representations, the Secretary of State has concluded that that he should seek further evidence concerning the availability or otherwise of alternative sites and that for this purpose it is appropriate to re-open the inquiry. The matters on which the Secretary of State requires further evidence are as follows :
a) the availability and suitability for the proposed development of land at

• Brighton Station

• Brighton Greyhound Stadium
• Shoreham Harbour

• Sheepcote Valley

• Toad's Hole Valley

• Waterhall

• Withdean Stadium

In each case against the following criteria:
(i) Is the site within the conurbation of Brighton and Hove, thereby complying with Football League requirements?
(ii) Is site acquisition a realistic proposition?
(iii) Is the site large enough for a 22,000 capacity community stadium together with a bus/coach park?
(iv) Can a stadium be built without incurring unaffordable development costs on the site?
(v) Can a stadium be built on the site without resulting in any over-riding safety/stadium management problems?
(vi) Are there any over-riding site specific planning issues?
(vii) Is the site accessible by sustainable modes of transport?
(viii) Can a stadium be built on the site without resulting in any unacceptable environmental impacts?
(ix) Can a stadium be built on the site without any unacceptable visual impacts?

b) The estimated cost of the development at Falmer and all of the above sites having regard to the advice in PPG7 "The Countryside - Environmental Quality and Economic and Social Development" that major development proposals in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty should be demonstrated to be in the public interest and should include assessments of the cost and scope of developing elsewhere outside the AONB or meeting the need for it in some other way

c) Whether there are any other sites that could be suitable for the proposed development, having regard to the above criteria.

d) The implications for the application site and for any of the other alternative sites located within the Sussex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty of the proposed designation of the South Downs National Park.

5. The Planning Inspectorate has been asked to make the procedural arrangements for re-opening the inquiry and they will shortly be in contact with you. The case officer in the Planning Inspectorate is Sian Evans, 3/17 Eagle Wing, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN: Tel No: 0117 372 8559

6. Copies of this letter have been sent to Brighton & Hove City Council, Lewes District Council all those who appeared at inquiry.

Yours faithfully,

Miss A Gerry

 

[dougdeep]

And?

 

[Halftime Oranges]

This is a repeat, just in case, somebody has not read the full implications of what Prescott's office said:

Dear Sir,

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 – SECTION 77
APPLICATIONS BY BRIGHTON AND HOVE ALBION FOOTBALL CLUB LTD
LAND NORTH OF VILLAGE WAY, FALMER
REF NO: BH2001/02418/FP; BH2003/02449/FP; LW/02/1595; LW/031618

1. I refer to the above applications, which have been called in for determination by the First Secretary of State. The applications relate to the erection of a new community football stadium for Brighton & Hove Albion Football Club Ltd with accommodation for Class B1 business, educational, conference, club shop merchandise, entertainment and food and road works, pedestrian and cycle links, coach/bus park and set down area. Shared use of existing car parking space at the University of Sussex and shared use of land for recreation and parking at Falmer High School.

2. The applications were the subject of an inquiry conducted by J R Collyer MRTPI, FRICS. The inquiry opened on 18 February 2003 and closed on 23 October 2003. A copy of the Inspector's report is enclosed.

3. Following the close of the inquiry, the First Secretary of State was aware that progress had been made on the draft Brighton and Hove Local Plan with publication of the Inspector’s Report. He had also received the representations from you, by a letter dated 11 March, on behalf of the applicants. As the matters referred to above related to issues arising since the close of the inquiry, the Secretary of State offered parties the opportunity to comment on the representations in his letter of 19 March 2004. Further letters and comments were circulated under cover of the letters of 26 May and 4 and 23 June 2004. Representations received in response to the letter of 23 June are listed in the attached schedule and are enclosed for information.

4. Following consideration of these representations, the Secretary of State has concluded that that he should seek further evidence concerning the availability or otherwise of alternative sites and that for this purpose it is appropriate to re-open the inquiry. The matters on which the Secretary of State requires further evidence are as follows :
a) the availability and suitability for the proposed development of land at

• Brighton Station

• Brighton Greyhound Stadium
• Shoreham Harbour

• Sheepcote Valley

• Toad's Hole Valley

• Waterhall

• Withdean Stadium

In each case against the following criteria:
(i) Is the site within the conurbation of Brighton and Hove, thereby complying with Football League requirements?
(ii) Is site acquisition a realistic proposition?
(iii) Is the site large enough for a 22,000 capacity community stadium together with a bus/coach park?
(iv) Can a stadium be built without incurring unaffordable development costs on the site?
(v) Can a stadium be built on the site without resulting in any over-riding safety/stadium management problems?
(vi) Are there any over-riding site specific planning issues?
(vii) Is the site accessible by sustainable modes of transport?
(viii) Can a stadium be built on the site without resulting in any unacceptable environmental impacts?
(ix) Can a stadium be built on the site without any unacceptable visual impacts?

b) The estimated cost of the development at Falmer and all of the above sites having regard to the advice in PPG7 "The Countryside - Environmental Quality and Economic and Social Development" that major development proposals in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty should be demonstrated to be in the public interest and should include assessments of the cost and scope of developing elsewhere outside the AONB or meeting the need for it in some other way

c) Whether there are any other sites that could be suitable for the proposed development, having regard to the above criteria.

d) The implications for the application site and for any of the other alternative sites located within the Sussex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty of the proposed designation of the South Downs National Park.

5. The Planning Inspectorate has been asked to make the procedural arrangements for re-opening the inquiry and they will shortly be in contact with you. The case officer in the Planning Inspectorate is Sian Evans, 3/17 Eagle Wing, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN: Tel No: 0117 372 8559

6. Copies of this letter have been sent to Brighton & Hove City Council, Lewes District Council all those who appeared at inquiry.

Yours faithfully,

Miss A Gerry

Your a twat nobody likes you
Die slowly

 

[perseus]

Has anybody got the text of the letter that adds on the two extra sites?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

surely FPC/LDC whoever also have to fund their own investigation into these sites to Prove they are more viable than Falmer though?

The UK's planning system is not designed to be a contest between equal parties. It's biased in favour of local planning authorities, who can get away with opinions, supported by policy statements. The developers are the ones who are expected to incur real costs in fighting their corner at Public Inquiries.

Theoretically, that helps sustain the principle of democracy. It falls down when a local planning authority (like Lewes DC) starts to intervene in planning applications that are outside their own geographic area.

Falmer Parish Council aren't a local planning authority, of course. But they can raise their own income from council tax and spend it on buying in advice. I doubt if they have enough money in the kitty to put together a very elaborate case for Shoreham Airport or Beeding Cement Works. But, as the Colbourne Kid says, the Albion will not be able to refute the Parish Council's claim that the Airport site and the Cement Works site are available and suitable, unless it produces expensive expert evidence.

 

[balloonboy]

Falmer Parish Council aren't a local planning authority, of course. But they can raise their own income from council tax and spend it on buying in advice. I doubt if they have enough money in the kitty to put together a very elaborate case for Shoreham Airport or Beeding Cement Works. But, as the Colbourne Kid says, the Albion will not be able to refute the Parish Council's claim that the Airport site and the Cement Works site are available and suitable, unless it produces expensive expert evidence.

Thankfully the FA Cup draw means the Albion will have a few more pounds in the kitty to spend on decent legal advice. FPC were no doubt not best pleased by that draw!!

 

[GNF on Tour]

Thankfully the FA Cup draw means the Albion will have a few more pounds in the kitty to spend on decent legal advice. FPC were no doubt not best pleased by that draw!!

True, but it would nice to have been able to spend the money on new players, new contracts (Harding) and the usual stuff football clubs spend money on.

Consultants are very expensive, I worked on the Chelsea and Wembley applications and the fees were staggering. I really worry for our long-term future.

 

[Marc]

True, but it would nice to have been able to spend the money on new players, new contracts (Harding) and the usual stuff football clubs spend money on.

Consultants are very expensive, I worked on the Chelsea and Wembley applications and the fees were staggering. I really worry for our long-term future.

Times like these though I'm glad we have to spend on the Falmer case if it helps secure our future in the long term.

 

[Bwian]

I've just re-read some of the conditions listed in the letter that "I'm an attention seeker-let me post drivel on here" re-posted.

It shouldn't take an awful lot of the club's money to prove that the 2 additional sites don't even remotely qualify as viable alternatives.

If that's the best they've got then start renting the JCBs.....

Kinda rules out Pende too doesn't it?

 

[Rangdo]

I've just re-read some of the conditions listed in the letter that "I'm an attention seeker-let me post drivel on here" re-posted.

It shouldn't take an awful lot of the club's money to prove that the 2 additional sites don't even remotely qualify as viable alternatives.

If that's the best they've got then start renting the JCBs.....

Kinda rules out Pende too doesn't it?

The more I look at the conditions the more I think that none of the other sites stands a chance and Prescott has worded it so that we'll get Falmer but it rules out any comeback from appeals. However, the club will have to cover all angles of all sites. It will be no good finding a flaw in one area and then leaving the rest because the inspector won't be too impressed if we are lacking the evidence. This is what will cost the money.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

The more I look at the conditions the more I think that none of the other sites stands a chance and Prescott has worded it so that we'll get Falmer but it rules out any comeback from appeals. However, the club will have to cover all angles of all sites. It will be no good finding a flaw in one area and then leaving the rest because the inspector won't be too impressed if we are lacking the evidence. This is what will cost the money.

Spot on.

That was the situation last July, when the new Inquiry was announced. Nothing has changed since then.

Apart from Falmer Parish Council adding two more sites to the list and Lewes District Council's key witness booking a ski-ing holiday and causing the start of the resumed Inquiry to be put back.

 

[perseus]

Read (b) again;

b) The estimated cost of the development at Falmer and all of the above sites having regard to the advice in PPG7 "The Countryside - Environmental Quality and Economic and Social Development" that major development proposals in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty should be demonstrated to be in the public interest and should include assessments of the cost and scope of developing elsewhere outside the AONB or meeting the need for it in some other way


This could be interpreted in a few different ways, or may appear straightforward.

I have no intention of misleading anybody. Even by selecting this extract, could be construed to mislead, so go back to the original if you think that is better.

It is a bit like the offside law "interfering with play" which I regard as unclear and unsatisfactory and open to different interpretations, depending on the referee.

If anybody wants to suggest what it means?

My inclination is to think it was drawn up in a bit of a hurry and may not mean much at all. But this is Civil Service jargon and out of my League.

In short, I think the ODPM have just left all options open with their non-decision. They have not made up their mind.

 

[The Large One]

It's a good job you haven't got a f***ing CLUE what you are on about, cos otherwise I might get a tad worried over this.

 

[perseus]

Well, you bloody ought to be worried! Or at least not complacent!

 

[The Large One]

How many more f***ing times, you pond life, oh, why do I bother? You have no idea what you are saying; you make it up as you go along. You are prepared to see Brighton & Hove Albion die, just so that you can scupper any airport expansion plans.

Go to bed, and don't bother getting up again.

 

[Bwian]

How many more f***ing times, you pond life, oh, why do I bother? You have no idea what you are saying; you make it up as you go along. You are prepared to see Brighton & Hove Albion die, just so that you can scupper any airport expansion plans.

Go to bed, and don't bother getting up again.

I think you may have reminded us exactly why "I'm a nonentity-let me post on here" Percy Pondlife keeps this pende shit in the forefront-he's an anti-airport expansionist who hasn't got the balls to come out and say so. Personally, I hope the middle of an extended runway eliminates the twat's favourite rockpool.

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

Just come across this little thread from nigh on ten years ago. Seems kind of strange reading it now that the Amex has been firmly established and we have completed three seasons there.

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

A bit awkward for perseus as well.

 

[East Preston Gull]

I have a source that tells me Falmer will happen and he is convinced it will be called the Amex community stadium. Can't reveal my source. Once we are in I feel we will have no more silly end of season dramas!