• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Building Work At The Ground

Status
Not open for further replies.
wayne entwhistle no9 said:
Interesting article on cricinfo by David Hopps. Looks like the Earl of Scarbrough who owns Lumley Castle is one of the main parties objecting to the floodlights and is helping co-ordinating support. Hopps goes as far as to say Durhams debt problems are so acute this could finish them. Not sure how accurate that last bit is but they are not just fighting a few neighbours on the local estate.
Click to expand...
If you're basically insolvent how can the club afford to invest in floodlights and the nursery - yes I know they'll be getting some money via grants but they will also have to put money in themselves.

vinegar hill said:
They should tell him to fuck off.
His ancestors probably plundered that castle to start with.
Click to expand...
I think .....
the Lumley family history is interesting, they didn't plunder the castle (and estate) they were originally given it by a Earl of Northumberland and the orinial 'Lumley' was a refugee Earl from the Battle of Hastings who escaped North went to the Earl of N and asked for help in continuing the fight against the Normans, which they did for a few years before switching sides to the 'winners'.
 
Last edited:

wayne entwhistle no9 said:
Interesting article on cricinfo by David Hopps. Looks like the Earl of Scarbrough who owns Lumley Castle is one of the main parties objecting to the floodlights and is helping co-ordinating support. Hopps goes as far as to say Durhams debt problems are so acute this could finish them. Not sure how accurate that last bit is but they are not just fighting a few neighbours on the local estate.
Click to expand...
Nothing in the article to suggest Scarbrough is co-ordinating support - The Trustees of the Lumley 1988 Settlement and the Earl of Scarbrough, who own the Lumley Estate, including Lumley Castle and Park, state

"We have been instructed to place an objection on behalf of the Estate to the above planning application on the following grounds:-

1. The structures will damage the visual amenity of Lumley Castle and Park, which is a listed building and an important part of County Durham?s historic landscape.
2. The light pollution will have a short term loss to the visual amenity of the Castle and Park whilst the lights are in operation.

It is also requested that, if the development is to be approved, irrespective of the Estate?s objection, that the applicants give proper consideration to retractable telescopic lights as these would have less impact on the points made above. We note that the applicants claim that the financial implications of purchasing telescopic lights mean that the scheme is not viable; we do not believe that this is sufficient reason to create a permanent structure that will blight the landscape and be to the detriment of heritage assets in the area."

Not a very strong objection,in my opinion. I think Hopp's article is just selecting the most prominent name he can find to fill out his article, with irrelevent material,which, otherwise, has little to say other than the main point that DCCC business plan for future development is stuffed if they lose international status and the loan will become a millstone,which has been the bottom line of Durham's application.
 
Sandboy said:
it's just bollocks made up by people who haven't got the balls to say I don't want my view spoiled - I bet most of them don't have a view at all anyway, unless they'r standing on a chair looking out the back bedroom window
Click to expand...
You're spot on. The number of sporting venues next to major roads must be an easy counter for the club. Hopefully the planning team at the council will see through the nimbyism and it will go through. I was at The Rose Bowl yesterday and that has developed enormously over the last couple of years. We'll need to keep pace with it to retain international fixtures.
 
CollingwoodFTM said:
You're spot on. The number of sporting venues next to major roads must be an easy counter for the club. Hopefully the planning team at the council will see through the nimbyism and it will go through. I was at The Rose Bowl yesterday and that has developed enormously over the last couple of years. We'll need to keep pace with it to retain international fixtures.
Click to expand...
Hampshire have a financial backer who has invested £17m into the development of the Hampshire CC estate.
 
CollingwoodFTM said:
You're spot on. The number of sporting venues next to major roads must be an easy counter for the club. Hopefully the planning team at the council will see through the nimbyism and it will go through. I was at The Rose Bowl yesterday and that has developed enormously over the last couple of years. We'll need to keep pace with it to retain international fixtures.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what the Council's outlook will be on this, I know they're meant to be unbiased and judge every application on its merit, but in my experience who you are and who you know goes a long way, do we have any sympathisers within the Council?
 
viccarlton said:
I'm not sure what the Council's outlook will be on this, I know they're meant to be unbiased and judge every application on its merit, but in my experience who you are and who you know goes a long way, do we have any sympathisers within the Council?
Click to expand...
Yes £6 million of sympathy which is the loan we have to repay. The council's own planning committee have recommended approval.
 
It grinds my gears, this is a potential international venue in Chester-Le-Street, it can only be good thing, publicity, bringing money into the area.

How good was the Ashes, why would we want to deny something similar.
 
johnson said:
It grinds my gears, this is a potential international venue in Chester-Le-Street, it can only be good thing, publicity, bringing money into the area.

How good was the Ashes, why would we want to deny something similar.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, but it's an easy decision for us that don't live adjacent to the ground.
 
Anyone buying a house near a cricket ground should expect a certain amount of disruption. At least they're not having cricket balls fly into their garden or through their front window.

It's just people moaning for the sake of moaning. Lights a problem? Well how do you walk home in the dark then?
 
tbh, I wouldn't worry about the permission...

If the planning officers have recomended acceptance then it's basically a done deal unless there are extraordinary circumstances - such as a mass public outcry. But for this, the County has backed the club since the days of Don Robson. The club is an asset not only for the county but also for the region as a whole. The County and Tyne and Wear spend lots of time encouraging companies to set up in the region and when they do that they'll be using everything as their disposal to demonstrate the benefits of the region, e.g. heritage, sport etc.

No one would want to put the kibosh on all that. If anything, they'll be wanting to build it up rather than knock it down.
 
wayne entwhistle no9 said:
Interesting article on cricinfo by David Hopps. Looks like the Earl of Scarbrough who owns Lumley Castle is one of the main parties objecting to the floodlights and is helping co-ordinating support. Hopps goes as far as to say Durhams debt problems are so acute this could finish them. Not sure how accurate that last bit is but they are not just fighting a few neighbours on the local estate.
Click to expand...

Bizarre given the money the hotel could make from the World Cup.

OK I wouldn't be too chuffed having six 55 metre floodlights outside my house, but he lives in Rotherham...
 
3 of the founds for the floodlights are ready. the other 3 are being worked on.

Anyone know what time the council meeting is tomorrow?
 
The Omega Man said:
3 of the founds for the floodlights are ready. the other 3 are being worked on.

Anyone know what time the council meeting is tomorrow?
Click to expand...
It'll be on the website along with the agenda.

Bri said:
It'll be on the website along with the agenda.
Click to expand...
2 pm and the floodlights thing is item no 5a

Bri said:
It'll be on the website along with the agenda.


2 pm and the floodlights thing is item no 5a
Click to expand...
here's the Planning Officer's report
You must be logged on to see external links
 
Last edited:
Bri said:
If you're basically insolvent how can the club afford to invest in floodlights and the nursery - yes I know they'll be getting some money via grants but they will also have to put money in themselves.


I think ......
Click to expand...
The floodights are, to my knowledge, being paid for my someone else ie the whole lot. I assume the ECB although have a sneaky feeling that just like the cost of the new ptich was part paid for by Sky TV the latter might be involved again.

As for the nursery; this is matched funding. They only need £50k from funding and £50k from other sources, the latter of which they have. Remember that the nursery pitch is already there, just out the back of the sports complex. I'm assuming they need the money to perhaps fence it off and build some sort of pavilion.

Bri said:
It'll be on the website along with the agenda.


2 pm and the floodlights thing is item no 5a


here's the Planning Officer's report
You must be logged on to see external links
Click to expand...
Brilliant. Recommendation to be approved!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
smoker said:
Do you know they haven't complained about them?
Click to expand...
Yes thats what the lad is saying. They have illuminated the whole estate for years and yet no one has said a word. The cricket club want floodights and all hell breaks loose.
 
smoker said:
Do you know they haven't complained about them?
Click to expand...

Don't know, don't care. One thing I do know is that these pitches are used all the time, keeps bairns off the streets, keeps them fit and healthy and also brings revenue into the area. Newcastle and Hartlepool have used these facilities in recent years as well. I don't buy into the pathetic objection of "The masts will make the area a less desirable place to visit resulting in a negative economic impact" total utter rubbish as proven already with the floodlights already behind the ground.

These floodlights have lit up the whole area for years but has brought loads of business to the area. Omega Man on here is a local resident and he's not aware of any complaints about these

Light pollution –Light spill will result in loss of privacy and distress. - what a load of rubbish

Lights will encourage loitering and anti-social behaviour - really?

Highway safety – impact on roads, including the A1(M), distraction to drivers resulting in highway safety concerns. Traffic queues and parking issues will be exacerbated. - more absolute rubbish

Existing infrastructure struggles to deal with current events. - more rubbish

A letter of support has been received from Chester-le-Street and District Business
Association
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top