Return to front page

Newest article: Don't think so by Unnamed SauceToday 21:47Today at 21:47:15view thread

Oldest article: Yeovil 1 Boro 3 by Unnamed Sauce17/8/2025 19:41Sun Aug 17 19:41:54 2025view thread

MenuSearch

Next thread: Tuesday’s result by Dougie85/11/2025 09:35Wed Nov 5 09:35:51 2025view thread

Re: Ground news

By Armchair vulture (Armchair Observer)6/11/2025 20:33Thu Nov 6 20:33:52 2025In response to Re: Ground news

Views: 1116

It doesn’t matter what you, me or anyone thinks - it’s what the planners think - they will base their decision on what local residents say together with what statutory consultees say and other issues. Other stat consultees would
Include Natural England and even Historic England . The highways agency will be one very important consultee who have to be consulted.
Take manor Park for example - when this ground was laid out around a century ago it was on the periphery of the town of Nuneaton surrounded mostly by fields and ribbon development,then over the years development occurred around it, mostly residential. So the ground was there and the congestion of crowds accepted. These days however the planning process is far more complicated and can cost big money.
Planning applications need to show public benefit in some circumstances.
Environmental factors are massive these days.
Imagine this - if you lived next to a business that was continually making noise and other disturbances and you objected you could, with others launch statutory or public nuisance litigation to stop the disturbance - noise, lighting, smells and other things.
Now you would think if the offending business was set up 50 years ago and your house and estate was built only one year ago the offending premises would say - “ but we were here first long before the houses”
One of the major pieces of nuisance law in Britain was Sturgess v Bridgeman in 1876 whereby a doctor opened a small consulting office in his garden but was troubled by a factory making noise next door. Of course the factory owner cried we’ve been here years so we have a right to make the noise and the doctor has only just set up.
So what was the outcome? The judge found in favour of the doctor as he stated that the nature of the location was predominantly residential so the factory owner must reduce the noise. The defence available, which is still in law today is Best practicable means which a business owner can use to basically stay in business. This defence is outlined in the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
Basically ,prescription - or who was there first is no defence in law when it comes to nuisance litigation.
None of this however will be related to the planning process but it mearly shows the complexity of law relating to sites which may create noise or disturbance to nearby residents.
Town may need to show how they intend to reduce the impact of traffic congestion and other potential problems that may be outlined in consultations.
Not an easy process at all is planning but Vale view does tick more than one box.
Good location within area where fans can easily walk to games.
Large area of land.
If town can work with locals then it would be a good location.
If they are refused planning permission then they could certainly appeal but they’ll need planning agents involved and they don’t come cheap.
Let’s hope the locals accept the proposals.
And of an appeal was needed it could eventually be called in by the planning inspector and could result in a public enquiry.
Hope your well 44 - mam isn’t too good these days but that’s another story.

Edited by Armchair Observer at 20:42:34 on 6th November 2025

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Next article in this thread: Re: Ground news by VoR6/11/2025 21:22Thu Nov 6 21:22:23 2025

Previous thread: Why not look at other grounds by bert's dad7/11/2025 11:43Fri Nov 7 11:43:55 2025view thread