Lord Bracknell
On fire
Yes.Yorkie said:
A European Court appeal is always possible, but must be on the grounds that the processes that have been followed are in breach of European Law. That is extremely unlikely. It's been a feature of the Public Inquiry that the Inspector has been meticulous in his efforts to ensure that all points of view have been fully heard.
The European Court of Human Rights, however, is another place.
As far as the Arsenal "Old Farts" are concerned, it is noteworthy that the lawyer who has been acting for the Islington Stadium Communities Alliance (ISCA) is Charlie Hopkins, who also represents Falmer Parish Council at the Albion Public Inquiry. ISCA are trying to take the Arsenal case to the European Court of Human Rights, alleging that the decision to grant planning permission for the new Arsenal Stadium has been rollercoastered over the residents.
BUT... There has been no Public Inquiry into the Arsenal application. Islington Council was 'minded to approve' the applications on 10 December 2001, and then the plans were submitted to the Mayor of London and the Secretary of State to make final decisions. Mayor Ken Livingstone gave his approval to the plans on 9 January 2002, and on 20 February 2002 the Secretary of State decided NOT to order a Public Inquiry.
It's the "NO PUBLIC INQUIRY" decision that is being challenged at the Human Rights Court, together with an allegation that information was withheld from the decision makers. That case is irrelevant to Falmer.
More details on the ISCA website,
http://www.redcard.org.uk/update.main.html
delivery to prescott and then an agreement....say jan 04
No. The Inspector will report to Prescott very shortly after the resumed Inquiry is concluded. The resumed Inquiry is ONLY about the access arrangements - although the Inspector will also wish to see the completed Section 106 agreements (which have been negotiated over the last few months). The Inquiry will be over by 24 October. The Inspector will already have completed his report on the other matters that have been dealt with in the earlier stages of the Inquiry. Expect Prescott to receive the Report in November.
go out to tender for building feb 04
I guess the tender documents are ready to be issued as soon as Prescott gives the go ahead. Preparing the documents is the time consuming part of the process. Responding to them is relatively straightforward. Basically, sully is right to be optimistic about the tendering timetable. The delay is not to do with the process of getting planning permission - it's to do with the time it's taken to get Brighton University's agreement to release the land.
Confirm the funding ( meet with lottery people etc) Sept 04
This will be achieved much earlier than Sep 04
agree the tender and draw up documents Jan 05
move builders in and start building March 05
Prepare site/excavate June 05
I would expect the main site to be available by the end of 2004, (once the University of Brighton have vacated their buildings). Other work might start earlier (eg improved access to Sussex University car parks)
Finish the construction of the site/infrastructure ( roads car parks etc) October 07
My guess is that we will see the first game played much earlier than that - probably in 2006.
Falmer will take a bit longer to build than Huddersfield. The Albion plan involves the excavation and removal of a load of chalk. The Huddersfield stadium was built on a flattened brown-field site.
And a brief word to overcgull ... Your assertion that Martin Perry is responsible for these delays is about as wildly wrong as it's possible to be.
