Artificial sports pitches and floodlights on a playing field close to an open-air theatre should be allowed, according to a report to the council’s Planning Committee.
The sports pitch plan was drawn up by Brighton, Hove And Sussex VI Form College (BHASVIC) for the top end of its playing field but has attracted an unusually high number of objections.
Many of the objectors fear that the noise and light from the sports pitch and floodlights would disrupt shows at the Brighton Open Air Theatre (BOAT), in Dyke Road Park, Hove.
Next week, Brighton and Hove City Council’s Planning Committee is due to decide the planning application which was submitted last November.
BHASVIC said that the application was for the “installation of an artificial grass pitch and multi-use games area (MUGA), with associated works, including lighting, access ramps, hard surfacing and a storage container.”
The report to the Planning Committee said: “Noise from the proposal would be readily audible from the BOAT venue and would have the potential to result in significant disruption to BOAT performances.
“To address these concerns, the applicant has put forwards substantially reduced hours of use up to 10pm Monday to Tuesday, 7pm Wednesday to Friday and 2pm on Saturdays, reduced further to 4pm Wednesday to Friday during school holidays.
“This is three hours earlier closing on Wednesdays and Thursdays during term time than originally proposed (six hours earlier during school holidays) and four hours earlier closing on Saturdays.
“These earlier closing times would also apply to the floodlights.
“The latest draft version of the ‘community use agreement’ additionally includes a clause relating to early closures, to be arranged case by case between the applicant and BOAT.”
The report also said that BOAT had 125 performances scheduled this year and the amended hours would mean that the BHASVIC pitches would be in use at the same time as a theatrical performance on only seven occasions.
It also said: “It is recognised that there would still be some overlap, that in many cases there is no buffer between the cessation of use of the pitch and the start of a performance and that BOAT’s schedule is subject to some degree of change.
“It may therefore be the case that the amount of overlap between the use of the (artificial sports pitches) and BOAT performances varies somewhat year by year.
“However, it is considered that an alternative blanket restriction on the use of the (artificial sports pitches) during some or all of BOAT’s five-month performance season would not be reasonable to impose.”
The reported noted that if planning permission were to be refused, nothing would prevent the existing turf pitches from being used when floodlights were not needed. It indicated that noise levels would be comparable.
It also said that the surroundings were not currently silent, adding: “Noise mitigation measures are also proposed, including dampeners on fencing, restrictions on whistle use and a noise management plan to encourage considerate player behaviour.
“Large groups of spectators are unlikely, given the small size of the (artificial sports pitches) and the absence of crowd facilities.”
Other objections to the sports pitches and floodlights came from people linked to the Friends of Dyke Road Park who had concerns about the potential effects of an artificial sports pitch on wildlife in the area.
The report said that the council had received 78 letters of support and concluded: “Overall and on balance, it is considered that the benefits for sport arising from the development, taken together with the proposed infill containment measures, the reduced hours of use to avoid the majority of overlap with BOAT performances and the proposed noise mitigation measures are sufficient to enable the proposal to be supported in principle.”
The council’s Planning Committee is due to meet at 2pm next Wednesday (2 September) at Hove Town Hall. The meeting is scheduled to be webcast.
…. and once they get the permission, take the first chance to appeal against the onerous restrictions, citing financial constraints and popular demand. Nail in the coffin for the arts and live, affordable theatre.
Given the school suggested the restrictions it would be very hard to then claim they were onerous and causing harm.
You do realise that it was the school that came up with the restrictions don’t you?
Cynical?
I did realise that the college came up with this report and suggestions. However once the dynamics change, they will cite circumstances are different and they will try to wriggle out of their commitment. If that makes me a cynic, then I will be happy to be proven wrong.