Brandon Update

[Gambo]

24 minutes ago, old bob at herne bay said:

Irrespective of the current planning decision, the site is owned by Brandon Estates. They can choose not to sell it (as they have done so far) and continue to stonewall on any decisions to do anything with the site , hoping for a a bumper payday after appealing and appealing the planning consent over and over again.

The potential value of the land for residential use (or building a new hospital , a new school, an new sports centre gym etc etc ) will be much more than any use for stock cars or speedway use.  

If Brandon Estates won't sell then I see no way  of speedway returning to the Brandon raceway ?

The lack of data on attendance at speedway meetings portrays Speedway as a sport administered by enthusiastic amateurs. Failure to produce such data suggests they have something to hide. Any business model for the speedway cannot be taken seriously without evidence of attendance at existing stadia.

 

 

A business model for Speedway is irrelevant. The viability of Speedway is irrelevant. The fact that someone is prepared to refurbish the stadium and run the two sports is surely an argument FOR the viability of the sport(s).

BE's failure to comply with the planning & safety requirements throughout their ownership, failure to provide and fund an alternative site for a stadium, ignoring local residents opposition for the redevelopment etc. should also be taken into account in rejecting their appeal.

[old bob at herne bay]

Gambo,

Brandon Estates clearly have absolutely no credibility in this matter so far , but they still own the site. They do not have to sell the site even if they lose the current planning appeal.

If the speedway /stock car business plan can be demonstrated to not be viable - that surely allows Brandon Estates to argue that retaining the stadium for sports/leisure use will provide no  benefit to the local community.

 

 

[Gambo]

1 hour ago, old bob at herne bay said:

Gambo,

Brandon Estates clearly have absolutely no credibility in this matter so far , but they still own the site. They do not have to sell the site even if they lose the current planning appeal.

If the speedway /stock car business plan can be demonstrated to not be viable - that surely allows Brandon Estates to argue that retaining the stadium for sports/leisure use will provide no  benefit to the local community.

 

 

Surely it should be up to BE to PROVE that Speedway/Stox is not viable.

[Deano]

18 minutes ago, Gambo said:

Surely it should be up to BE to PROVE that Speedway/Stox is not viable.

Which is why BE keep banging on about the millions needed to bring the stadium up to scratch. But not once did I hear anyone challenge why is it in such a bad state anyway. 

Edited October 1, 2023 by Deano

[Toady]

1 hour ago, Gambo said:

Surely it should be up to BE to PROVE that Speedway/Stox is not viable.

That is what goatly was doing all last week !

[Gambo]

10 minutes ago, Toady said:

That is what goatly was doing all last week !

He did not prove anything. Merely elicited an opinion. There were no figures (from either side) to prove or disprove viability.

[Deano]

17 minutes ago, Gambo said:

He did not prove anything. Merely elicited an opinion. There were no figures (from either side) to prove or disprove viability.

Correct, even Osborne was saying “in my opinion!”

[Toady]

Well I hope  the inspector sees it that way and discounts osbournes figures

Edited October 1, 2023 by Toady

[Deano]

Do Poole get 1100-1200 average? That was quoted by Osborne. 

[Toady]

12 hours ago, Deano said:

Do Poole get 1100-1200 average? That was quoted by Osborne. 

They must do as he is the Landlord of the stadium so his figures are accurate I would also say the figures he suggested for Swindon would be correct ,so as you see he did come prepared with facts unlike a previous poster suggested

Edited October 2, 2023 by Toady

[SteveLyric2]

2 hours ago, Toady said:

They must do as he is the Landlord of the stadium so his figures are accurate I would also say the figures he suggested for Swindon would be correct ,so as you see he did come prepared with facts unlike a previous poster suggested

Didn't he also say that figure wasn't a recent figure as it increases due to Poole's successes?!

I still question his figures though! In addition to the Speedway staff on every turnstile/entrance there are also stadium H&S staff with 'clickers' doing a  body count but hey are easily distracted, often disappearing for a 'chit-chat' or a quiet smoke etc!!

[Toady]

3 hours ago, Skidder1 said:

Didn't he also say that figure wasn't a recent figure as it increases due to Poole's successes?!

I still question his figures though! In addition to the Speedway staff on every turnstile/entrance there are also stadium H&S staff with 'clickers' doing a  body count but hey are easily distracted, often disappearing for a 'chit-chat' or a quiet smoke etc!!

Yes he did say that, and the average for Poole would go up with their success (I think Matt ford said as much)but no one challenged him from scs side on that or anything else for that matter so basically what he said was well presented for inspector to look at later.

[Lioness]

On 9/28/2023 at 11:35 PM, kitten2502 said:

That has confused me - what input can they possibly have?

Also, didn't Mr Humphreys state Jeff Davies wanted to "take to the mike" at the start of todays proceedings? 

The NHS say could work for speedway. Building houses on even part of the site will put considerable extra strain on NHS facilities for the entire area. I assume (happy to be proven wrong) that the areas NHS facilities are currently stretched pretty much to breaking point as it is and would need significant investment to cope. 
 

[1 valve]

On 10/1/2023 at 4:32 PM, Deano said:

Which is why BE keep banging on about the millions needed to bring the stadium up to scratch. But not once did I hear anyone challenge why is it in such a bad state anyway. 

The state of the stadium/site is what it is. How it got there is of no interest to the inspector in deciding if the site can be developed either for building houses or it’s impact on the viability of reintroducing speedway/stocks in a new stadium should BE agree to sell if their appeal fails. 
 

Edited October 4, 2023 by 1 valve

[uk_martin]

On 9/28/2023 at 7:28 PM, iainb said:

Something to do with the NHS wanting a say... so if they've gone onto an NHS waiting list it could be another couple of years! And I thought the NHS supposed to treat ill people, apparently not these days

 

On 9/28/2023 at 11:51 PM, naffer said:

NHS want money from Brandon estates if the site is developed for houses ,to compensate for services to be rendered as it were ,£133k I think.

Are there any other examples of how housing developments provide funding streams directly into the NHS?  I always thought that the NHS was funded either by National or Local Government, who would (sometimes badly) assess the healthcare requirements of a region and provide funding accordingly. The NHS doesn't to my mind have the authority to charge money for that kind of thing themselves.

Also, take Perry Barr as an example. Post Commonwealth Games, what was going to be the "Athletes Village" is being sold off (very slowly). There are 947 apartments up for sale, which will result in some 1800 - 2000 extra residents settling in Perry Barr. (how big is Brandon's proposed development?) And that's not to mention 9 other plots of land ready for development in Perry Barr for even more housing, There's not been any expansion in healthcare capacity, nor have we heard from the NHS about needing extra funding for this.

All very odd.

[arnieg]

25 minutes ago, uk_martin said:

 

Are there any other examples of how housing developments provide funding streams directly into the NHS?  I always thought that the NHS was funded either by National or Local Government, who would (sometimes badly) assess the healthcare requirements of a region and provide funding accordingly. The NHS doesn't to my mind have the authority to charge money for that kind of thing themselves.
 

The issue is NHS funding is determined by historic data and that means new residents of the development are unfunded for the first year of occupation. It is that shortfall that the NHS are seeking to cover using the argument that it falls within the CIL (or whatever 'planning gain' is called this week)

[SPEEDY69]

Surely viability is a question solely for those who are running or wish to run a club.  If it wasn't, they'd soon disappear.  Neither Poole or Swindon have done because of viability so why is it important if the crowd figure is 10k, 1k or 1, in terms of viability?  

[SteveLyric2]

3 hours ago, SPEEDY69 said:

Surely viability is a question solely for those who are running or wish to run a club.  If it wasn't, they'd soon disappear.  Neither Poole or Swindon have done because of viability so why is it important if the crowd figure is 10k, 1k or 1, in terms of viability?  

Viability is still relevant to the BE case as they would still own the site and expect a 'healthy' rental from any users.

Edited October 5, 2023 by Skidder1

[marko]

If Brandon Estates are happy to sit on the land for years to come hoping that a change of mind might happen that that will be that.

The council can’t make them sell the land, but whether legally possible, could they pass a motion that the land is to be retained for the exclusive use of sport for the next 10, 20, 30 years?
Brandon estates might then sell the land  if they know there is no realistic chance they will ever be able to do anything with it? It’s not like there is a lack of space to build elsewhere in the country, plenty of brown field sites are going that way.

[SPEEDY69]

41 minutes ago, Skidder1 said:

Viability is still relevant to the BE case as they would still own the site and expect a 'healthy' rental from any users.

But no-oe is suggesting they won't get the rental. If the prospective promoters are happy to pay it I still don't see what crowd sizes at other tracks matter to this hearing. Have BE stated what rent they'd expect?