Friends of Dyke Road Park have raised concerns about the potential effects of an artificial sports pitch on wildlife in the area.
The group organised a public meeting attended by more than 30 people to discuss environmental concerns related to plans by Brighton, Hove And Sussex VI Form College (BHASVIC) for an artificial pitch on its playing field.
Among the group’s worries were the potential loss of biodiversity and the ways that proposed floodlights would affect insects, birds and bats.
The group’s vice-chair Steve Geliot, an environmental campaigner who has raised awareness about falling starling numbers, was concerned about the effects of light pollution.
He said that the proposed floodlights were a risk to insects, birds and bats because of the 4,000k white colour spectrum.
Mr Geliot said: “We are highlighting the biodiversity impacts, the light pollution, the detrimental visual impacts on Dyke Road Park due to 4.5-metre steel fencing and 10-metre-high light columns.
“The loss of natural forage is offset by proposals for biodiversity net gain (BNG) purchased from the Iford estate (near Lewes).
“Iford are doing some fantastic work but the use if BNG in this way is effectively exporting biodiversity from our city.”
Mr Geliot said that ecologist Graeme Lyons has recorded 500 species in the field, 11 with conservation status.
The Friends of the Park were also concerned that similar facilities already existed at the neighbouring Cardinal Newman Catholic School.
Members said that the college now had almost 4,000 students and questioned the need for sports facilities, saying that they would benefit only “elite” sports teams without offering sport qualifications.
They also recognised concerns about noise raised by the Brighton Open Air Theatre situated in the park, resulting in the college carrying out additional noise tests.
BHASVIC principal William Baldwin said: “This development will deliver a net-gain in biodiversity as shown in the planning documents.
“We have completed extensive ecological surveys in order to submit our plans with appropriate mitigations in place in order to minimise the impact of this work.
“We have worked closely with Friends of the Field to help increase the biodiversity of the community area of our playing fields and look forward to continuing this relationship.
“We have a thriving sport, exercise and health department offering A-level PE, various sport BTEC pathways and enrichment provision to hundreds of students.
“This year alone has seen our ladies’ football academy reach the National Colleges Cup semi-final and our netball academy reach the finals of the National Schools U-19 competition, beating predominantly independent schools along the way.
“Currently, our students have to go off-site for all their curriculum practicals, training and matches.”
There are currently 1,350 objections and 78 supporting comments about the application on Brighton and Hove City Council’s website.
To see the application or to comment on it, click here and search for BH2025/02901 on the council’s website.
I really think the BNG should be kept on the City.
Well that’s played the ecology card. Must be time to include pensioners and disabled people. And I would not say that Newman is nearby, fair old walk as I recall.
BHCC do not care. They are, in effect, the applicants since the college is part of the LEA. So they put in an application to themselves and then decide to approve it. This is what has just happened at Longhill High School despite several policy breaches on the city plan and NPPF guidance. They ignored comments from our own acoustic consultant who pointed out evidence of underplaying the likely dB levels coming from a 3G pitch. The council claim to have a robust
environmental city plan and say one thing BUT do another if there is money to be made. DEFRA Statement May 2025: 3G pitches with SBR rubber crumb are the PRIMARY SOURCE OF MICROPLASTIC POLLUTION in the UK from intentionally added microplastics. FIDRA Statement: 3G pitches typically lose between 1 to 5 tonnes of micropastic crumb annually.
Marine Conservation Society has access to research showing how heavy metals, polycyclic hydrocarbons and volatile organic compounds, ALL FOUND IN SBR crumb, have in laboratory tests, resulted in organ deformation and malfunction for marine organisms including blindness and heart malfunctions, shortened life span and inability or reduced ability to produce offspring. BUT HEY!! THAT’S OK SO LONG AS THE CITY CAN INSTALL MORE PLASTIC POLLUTING PITCHES. BHCC’s thirst for 3G thirst for approving commercial planning applications that pollute the soil, ground water and marine habitats will continue until we find a way to hold them accountable for their actions. JUNE 2025 PROFESSOR FIONA MATHEWS @ SUSSEX UNIVERSITY PRESS RELEASE TO THE BBC NEWS: Research across 51 sites locally found mictoplastics in the stomachs of soil inhabitants including earthworms, grubs, beetles etc which in turn, pass on up the food chain into mammals, birds and reptiles. She described the prevalence of microplastics as ubiquitous to all soil related inhabitants but which also pass on to birds and marine life. We poop microplastics, its in our water and our brains.
But what does BHCC decide to do? Rip up 7000 square metres of grass and replace it with synthetic polypropylene turf and SBR rubber crumb. In csse you don’t know SBR rubber crumb comes from recycled car tyres which is why toxns are found in it. Car tyres cannot be taken to a refuse centre because they are classified as toxic waste. But Hey, its ok to granulate it and replace natural grass with it!! Is this called progress? It is absolute MADNESS AND THAT IS WHAT BHCC ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR. They even know about environmental alternative pitch systems like HYDROROCK SUBSTRATE and HYDROFIELDS which uses basalt fibre blocks beneath soil. This pitch system is better the 3G pitches for surface drainage and storage. It attenuates water naturally and there are NO MICROPLASTICS and the pitch is expected to LAST FOR 60+ YEARS!! SO ENVIRONMENTAL COST EFFECTIVE AND SUPERIOR TO 3G PITCH DRAINAGE!! So WHY IS BHCC NOT INSTALLING THESE PITCH SYSTEMS INSTEAD OF 3G PITCHES?? IS ANYONE LISTENING? ARGUS? BRIGHTON & HOVE NEWS? NATIONAL NEWSPAPERS? We need to know why BHCC is hell bent on a polluting 3G pitch development plan when there are greener and more cost effective altetnatives like HYDROFIELDS which can operate beneath grass pitches. ALSO I believe I read somewhere that grass pitches (7000 sq metres) typically remove 8.4 tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere annually. BHCC WHAT ARE YOU UP TO? WHY AREN’T YOU LISTENING? YOU KNOW ALL OF THIS CONTENT. I TOLD YOU AT A DEPUTATION IN DECEMBER 2025.
There are some fair environmental questions here that are worth exploring. If a 3G pitch is proposed, the design should be clear about things such as microplastics and what containment measures are planned. Given that we sit on a chalk aquifer in Brighton, it’s a reasonable detail.
At the same time, it helps to keep this grounded, especially considering that regulatory reviews haven’t found an acute health risk from these pitches. The more practical question is about cumulative environmental impact and whether lower-pollution or reinforced natural options have been fully assessed.
If alternatives exist, it’s a fair question to ask if they have been costed and compared. And if biodiversity net gain is being delivered off-site, that’s a policy choice people are entitled to understand.
I heard on the radio the other day that this must-have sports field surfacing could become the next “asbestos” with all schools and sports venues ripping them out again within a few short years for health and safety reasons. I think manufacturers should have to provide a health and safety risk audit before installation at the very least and ensure school/sports club indemnity insurance covers pupils/users against potential health risks for using it. If the insurance won’t cover health risks to users, that should make the decision.
If new evidence emerges, standards can and should change. Until then, the debate is probably more about environmental trade-offs than immediate health danger.