Falmer Stadium: Threat to the South Downs casts a national shadow

8 February 2006

The Government’s decision to allow a new football stadium and coach park on a sensitive greenfield site at Falmer in the South Downs [1] casts a shadow over the future of our finest landscapes nationwide.

CPRE [2] fought the Falmer proposals through two planning inquiries [3]. We welcome the decision by Lewes District Council and others to challenge John Prescott’s decision in the courts [4].

In an open letter to the Secretary of State released today (Wednesday), CPRE expresses its disappointment at the decision to allow a massive new stadium development in the Sussex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The site is also partly within what is expected to become Britain’s newest National Park [5]. CPRE has further concerns about the possible use of similar reasoning to assess cases affecting landscapes elsewhere [6].

CPRE Head of Planning, Henry Oliver, said:

‘When he announced the Government's plans to designate the South Downs a National Park in 1999, John Prescott described it as a “present from Labour to the nation”. That makes this decision – made for what we think are the wrong reasons [7] and which will do lasting damage to one of our finest landscapes – even worse.’

– END –

NOTES FOR EDITORS

1. In a decision letter dated 27 October 2005, the Secretary of State, John Prescott granted planning permission for a football stadium for Brighton and Hove Albion Football Club and an associated coach and bus interchange, together with related development.

2. CPRE, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, is a charity which promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England. We advocate positive solutions for the long-term future of the countryside. Founded in 1926, we have 60,000 supporters and a branch in every county. President: Sir Max Hastings. Patron: Her Majesty The Queen.

3. Following the Secretary of State’s decision to call in the Falmer stadium proposals for a public inquiry, the Inspector recommended that the case against the proposals was ‘overwhelming’ and that they should be refused. The Secretary of State then re-opened the inquiry under a new inspector to assess alternative sites. The second Inspector found that there was no reasonable prospect of planning permission being granted for a stadium at any of the alternative sites. The Secretary of State subsequently decided to approve the proposals.

4. Lewes District Council has made an application under s. 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to quash the Secretary of State’s decision. Falmer Parish Council, the Sussex Downs Society and the South Downs Joint Committee have all committed financial support for the challenge.

5. A Designation Order for a South Downs National Park was submitted by the Countryside Agency to the Secretary of State in January 2003. A public inquiry into the Order ran from November 2003 to March 2005. The Government’s decision on the Inspector’s report is awaited. The site of the proposed stadium is in the South Downs Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), while the site of the proposed transport interchange for the stadium is within the boundary of the designated National Park.

6. Copies of the letter will be available at the time of embargo – please contact James Carlin jamesc@cpre.org.uk, tel. 020 7981 2820.

7. In particular CPRE is concerned that the Secretary of State appears to have decided that essentially local factors, eg. to do with economic regeneration and Brighton and Hove Albion FC’s self-imposed lack of a home ground, were sufficient to override the clear statement in national planning policy that ‘major developments should not take place in [National Parks or Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty], except in exceptional circumstances’ (PPS7 Sustainable Development in Rural Areas, 2004, paragraph 22).

---

Press releases, papers and documents published on this page are the intellectual property of an organisation unrelated to Central Lobby. We promote their parliamentary and political campaigning activities as they are subscribers to the Central Lobby service.

As such, Central Lobby does not edit, endorse, or attempt to balance the opinions expressed on this page. The content of press releases and other such types of content are the responsibility of the originating organisation.