«

»

Apr 17 2014

Bob Blackman MP Condemns ‘Disgraceful’ Hive Decision

bob_blackmanBob Blackman, MP for Harrow East, has condemned the decision by Labour and Independent Labour Councillors on Harrow Council to vote against the planning officer’s recommendations with respect to the Hive.

Local residents have had their view blighted by a West Stand far exceeding the terms of planning permission and their homes are being lit up late into the evening by floodlights far exceeding their original terms. It was recommended by the officer that the Council stand by their decision to refuse retrospective planning permission, but this was voted down by a Labour alliance.

Bob Blackman commented, “While our Conservative Councillors voted to continue action against Barnet FC for this outrageous flouting of planning rules, unfortunately the Labour and Independent Labour Councillors were not so concerned for local residents, voting against and then carrying the vote with an Independent Labour Councillor acting as Chair of the Committee. It is utterly disgraceful and shows nothing but contempt for everyone who has had their view blighted and whose homes are being lit up all hours by the ridiculous situation with the floodlights.”

He continued: “Barnet FC have shown a staggering brass neck by refusing to correct these issues and for pursing legal action instead. It is beyond disappointing that these Councillors are siding with them and trampling on local concerns. People living in Queensbury and Edgware will remember this betrayal and I doubt they will be voting Labour for the foreseeable future because of it.”

 

(Visited 20 times, 1 visits today)

6 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. John Clement

    Barnet FC is a small, struggling, poor sporting club trying to provide something for the community. How come the politicos always rubber stamp i n your face developments when it is a huge wealthy property developer or builder or slum landlord. Unlike the Hive these housing developments will destroy the environs for gernerations.

  2. CamroseRob

    More political points scoring from Mr marginal seat Blackman.
    The Hive stand and floodlights were never illegal and all the flouting of planning rules was done by Councillors last year.

    No legal action has been taken, all the hive have done is asked the governments planning inspectorate to review the decision as it was against planning law. That the council have found themselves unable to justify their actions and have chosen not to provide any evidence to the inspector shows how poor the decision was.

  3. Jeremy Zeid

    So “poor and struggling” that they could afford to gamble on flouting the planning conditions, spend a fortune on extra building, lights and lawyers fees, and end up costing the taxpayer. As for the “environs”, tell us about the cars clagging up the sidestreets, or the light spill into people’s homes. Must be shareholders or Labour agitators

  4. CamroseRob

    The fact that the Councils case is so poor that they were unable to find a planning expert to represent them speaks volumes.
    The permission to polute the neighbourhood with lightspill and the additional local parking was all granted by the council in 2008.

    The changes made have not made these factors worse, it is that the stadia has now been built that has brought the issue to light. I beleive we are still waiting for the council to show that the newer and more modern lights produce more lightspill than those approved in 2008.

    The original lights were angled at 85 degrees and so pointed the light almost horizontal across the site. I am yet to see any evidence tbat we would’ve been better off with what the council had already approved.

  5. Cllr Willy Stoodley

     My dear Bobby, you know I do not believe there is a single accurate fact in your statement; but then you never did understand the planning issues concerning The Hive so let me explain them.  The planning officers recommended refusal on the grounds of Environmental Health requiring more information on the brightness of the floodlights; the September Committee added reasons to refuse the west stand also, which reasons turned out to be completely unsustainable.  The April Committee therefore voted to withdraw those unsustainable reasons and, in the complete and utter lack of any evidence presented by Environmental Health and no Environmental Health Officer present at the Committee to answer questions, the Committee voted to withdraw the reason for refusal for the floodlights also.

    So, taking your your rant point by point Bobby, and I quote:

    1:  “decision by Labour and Independent Labour…”
    WRONG!  It was a CROSS-PARTY COMMITTEE decision.  For = 2 Labour votes and one ILG vote;  Against = 1 Labour vote and two Conservative votes; Abstained = 1 Conservative vote.  Result = tied vote which gives the Chair the casting vote; so I decided to throw the whole lot out to stop wasting the Council’s time and money and prevent the risk of suit that could potentially cost £1million.  So Bobby it was NOT a decision by Labour/ILG.

    2: “the planning officers’ recommendations…”
    WRONG!  As explained above, it was ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH.

    3:  “view blighted by a west stand…”
    WRONG!  You cannot see that stand from Aldridge Avenue if there is a train on the line.

    4:  “homes being lit up late into the  evening…”
    WRONG!  New Environmental Health test results taken in January showed maximum brightness 50% lower than that allowed.  Not a single letter of complaint has been received by Harrow Council about the floodlights, as confirmed in public at Cabinet Questions by the CONSERVATIVE leader.

    5:  “floodlights far exceeding their original terms.”
    WRONG!  (a) see 4 above and (b) as to the height and shape, the report recommendation was to grant!

    6:  “refuse retrospective planning permission…”
    WRONG!  Now you really HAVE lost the plot Bobby – the Officers’ recommendation was to WITHDRAW the reasons for refusal!

    7:  “voted down by a Labour alliance.”
    WRONG!  See 1 above.

    8:  “Conservative Councillors voted to continue action…”
    WRONG!  See 1 above.

    9:  “Labour and Independent Labour…voting against…”
    WRONG!  See 1 above.

    10:  “utterley disgraceful…”
    Well you know all about utterley disgraceful behaviour, don’t you Bobby?!  Remind us – how many affairs have you had?  And which prospective female Conservative Party candidate was it that you took to No. 10?

    And howcome you’re facebook friends with Joseph Antignolo, former Chair of the Conservative Club in Wembley who used to be the book keeper for the former Soho prostitution and pornography crime magnate Jim Humphreys? (Visit the following links and search for “Joseph Antignolo” on Bob Blackman’s facebook friends)

    https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.obituaries/lCKOKi-HXQE

     http://www.nickelinthemachine.com/2008/06/soho-and-the-fall-of-the-dirty-squad/

     http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/jimmy-and-rusty-it-was-a-small-event-at-southwark-and-it-ended-in-small-jail-sentences-but-jimmy-humphreys-in-better-days-right-was-a-caesar-of-soho-and-his-wife-rusty-an-empress-of-vice-when-they-come-out-how-will-they-supplement-their-pensions-report-andrew-weir-1411438.html
      

  6. John Clement

    Barnet/Broncos play for about 60-80 hours a year -the block of flats dumoed in roxeth after original planning permission had been refused will be there eevery minute of every day. So will “affordable” housing built on our fields & green space -object to that but then the developers, & slum landlords are good “lobbyists” aren’t they and support the “political process”.

Comments have been disabled.