Hive

The best threads archived for eternal enjoyment.

Re: Hive

Postby Mr Smart » 24 Jul 2013, 17:12

Reading the rationale about the height of floodlights then it makes a lot of sense. Doesn't make sense why they would pick up on that one!
Mr Smart
 
Posts: 2761
Joined: 24 Jan 2011, 18:20

Re: Hive

Postby Moonchild_Bee » 24 Jul 2013, 17:14

Picking up on later comments - it seems largely fair enough?

"Officers agree, on balance, with this assessment subject to specific provisions and
conditions that would be required (as set out above). Officers also consider that the
scope of the amendments being sought can properly be considered within the provisions
set out by the government under S73 of the Town and Country Planning Act for material
minor amendments. In respect of the majority of the works contained in this application
officers consider the proposals are acceptable having regard to the development plan
and all other material considerations.


However, in the absence of the requested information regarding the impact of light from
the new, higher floodlights, and notwithstanding conclusions surrounding the visual
impact (upon the character and appearance of the area) the application does not provide
information that enables officers to conclude that the amended floodlights to the stadium
satisfy the requirements of policy DM1C and DM48A. Given that the representations
suggest that glare from existing lighting is already giving rise to disturbance of sleep
patterns in properties surrounding the site, this lack of information is significant. The
Environmental protection team of the Council has concluded that without this information
(requested during the processing of this application), the proposals should be refused.

Given the clear policy requirement for floodlights to not have an unacceptable impact
upon the amenity of residents, the current application is not able to demonstrate that it
satisfies the requirements of the development plan for the area. There are considered to
be no material planning reasons to justify setting aside this policy objective in this case.

The application is therefore recommended for refusal."
Moonchild_Bee
 

Re: Hive

Postby 1983 » 24 Jul 2013, 17:22

Plan showing the 2008 floodlights and the recently added ones:
Attachments
hive.JPG
1983
 
Posts: 89
Joined: 18 Nov 2012, 09:44

Re: Hive

Postby lyonsdownbee » 24 Jul 2013, 17:26

So it's only then floodlights that are the issue.
Do Abacus do sale and return.
lyonsdownbee
 
Posts: 584
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 02:19

Re: Hive

Postby Moonchild_Bee » 24 Jul 2013, 17:33

Surely we can just dig 10 metre deep holes for them :whistle:
Moonchild_Bee
 

Re: Hive

Postby 1983 » 24 Jul 2013, 18:27

Sounds like the club and Abacus are to blame for failing to provide the necessary paperwork, which was requested by the planning officers.
1983
 
Posts: 89
Joined: 18 Nov 2012, 09:44

Re: Hive

Postby ninestein » 24 Jul 2013, 19:12

The proposed idea being debated is better for everyone. LUL must see the benefit of it as they get no light spill from the Eastern floods. The technology that goes into manufacturing sports light fittings has moved on at such a pace in recent years. Each flood will be individually "aimed" at a certain part of the pitch. If you look towards that flood from a wide angle you'll get hardly any glare at all.

To me, the only issue here is that retrospective permission cannot currently be recommended for acceptance until the necessary lighting design and photometrics are completed properly and submitted. To me there's just a delay in the date that we get official permission to install them. In the meantime, we carry on as we are...? But can we use the floodlights we have installed in the hope of retrospective planning permission...?
Barnet showing all the flair of Rupert-the-Bears trousers, but lots more style!
User avatar
ninestein
 
Posts: 5516
Joined: 03 Aug 2011, 20:00

Re: Hive

Postby hoofer2 » 24 Jul 2013, 19:22

ninestein wrote:The proposed idea being debated is better for everyone. LUL must see the benefit of it as they get no light spill from the Eastern floods. The technology that goes into manufacturing sports light fittings has moved on at such a pace in recent years. Each flood will be individually "aimed" at a certain part of the pitch. If you look towards that flood from a wide angle you'll get hardly any glare at all.

To me, the only issue here is that retrospective permission cannot currently be recommended for acceptance until the necessary lighting design and photometrics are completed properly and submitted. To me there's just a delay in the date that we get official permission to install them. In the meantime, we carry on as we are...? But can we use the floodlights we have installed in the hope of retrospective planning permission...?


If we do not get the required permission, I suggest focussing each lamp into a separate upstairs bedroom in each of the NIMBYS houses so that they can really appreciate what light pollution is.

I am sure I saw a plan with revised floodlight scope that had more lines that Keith Richard's face looking down toward the pitch as part of The Hive plans? It was rather bewildering. Surely a simulation on a computer using architectural software package is the answer!
hoofer2
 
Posts: 3468
Joined: 01 Feb 2011, 13:48

Re: Hive

Postby pauln50 » 24 Jul 2013, 19:27

If we do not get the required permission, I suggest focussing each lamp into a separate upstairs bedroom in each of the NIMBYS houses so that they can really appreciate what light pollution is.

:ohlord: Love it Hoofer!!
User avatar
pauln50
 
Posts: 1164
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 15:36
Location: Bedford

Re: Hive

Postby WelwynBee » 24 Jul 2013, 19:29

That was indeed a quality post, I'm still laughing.
WelwynBee
 
Posts: 1066
Joined: 23 Feb 2012, 22:24

Re: Hive

Postby BeesKnees » 24 Jul 2013, 20:14

Drink license for west stand granted :)
User avatar
BeesKnees
 
Posts: 6450
Joined: 17 Apr 2012, 16:49

Re: Hive

Postby pauln50 » 24 Jul 2013, 20:17

BarnetSteve wrote:Drink license for west stand granted :)

Mines a pint!!
User avatar
pauln50
 
Posts: 1164
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 15:36
Location: Bedford

Re: Hive

Postby John_c » 24 Jul 2013, 21:18

BarnetSteve wrote:Drink license for west stand granted :)


Yay. Most important news of all :D
:geahh:

Proud Sponsor of Luisma Villa Lopez's Football Conference Winning Away Shirt. Season 2014/15

"Can't wait to hear the latest excuses from that bell end John C"
User avatar
John_c
 
Posts: 4947
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 08:23

Re: Hive

Postby BeesKnees » 25 Jul 2013, 08:15

1983 wrote:Sounds like the club and Abacus are to blame for failing to provide the necessary paperwork, which was requested by the planning officers.


The last information from Abacus states that the vertical light will be less than 2 lux. I think they believed that would be sufficent and it didnt need a further report. Sounds a bit daft, of course the floodlights will be visible, just like a torch pointed at the floor is visible from a long way off but you are still in the dark. As far as I can tell TK has bought the best floodlights possible to avoid light pollution, these guys provide the lighting for Lords Cricket ground so they should know what they are doing.
User avatar
BeesKnees
 
Posts: 6450
Joined: 17 Apr 2012, 16:49

Re: Hive

Postby Reckless » 25 Jul 2013, 17:37

John_c wrote:
BarnetSteve wrote:Drink license for west stand granted :)


Yay. Most important news of all :D

Just remember to bring you wallet son.............................
User avatar
Reckless
 
Posts: 2260
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 17:53
Location: Potters Bar

PreviousNext

Return to Classic Threads

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests