hammer1969 421 Posted September 29, 2023 I just received an email, probably along with many other people, from East Herts Council that the planning application to turn Rye House into a community leisure and sports hub and also for retrospective removal of the speedway track has today been refused. 9 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
arnieg 3,643 Posted September 29, 2023 39 minutes ago, hammer1969 said: I just received an email, probably along with many other people, from East Herts Council that the planning application to turn Rye House into a community leisure and sports hub and also for retrospective removal of the speedway track has today been refused. That's encouraging Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winstoncigar 23 Posted September 29, 2023 the officers report that accompanied the decision notice isn’t encouraging at all Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deano 1,318 Posted September 29, 2023 48 minutes ago, winstoncigar said: the officers report that accompanied the decision notice isn’t encouraging at all Can you elaborate please? I can’t find it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winstoncigar 23 Posted September 29, 2023 Just the section of the report relevant to speedway, my underlining! ‘The application site did house a Speedway Track and associated stands. The Speedway track has subsequently been removed from the site, with works starting to remove this in approximately the year 2020. The application proposes the replacement of this speedway track with a football pitch. A new football changing and clubhouse is proposed, alongside a dance studio, hospitality building, gymnastics building and gyms. With regards to policy CFLR1, the proposal does not result in the loss or reduction of open space, indoor or outdoor sport and recreation facilities. Whilst the Speedway track is lost, this is replaced by other outdoor and indoor sports and recreation facilities of a greater scale. As such, it is the officer’s view that there would likely be an increase in the level of sport and recreation facilities on site. It is the case that the Council would have had no control to require the speedway track to be re-provided and opened to the public. The Council would have no planning policy ground to insist that the specified sport and recreation facilities on site remain for Speedway Racing. The proposal is for a number of alternative new indoor and outdoor sport and recreation facilities on the site, providing replacement facilities on site, albeit for a variety of different sports. Sports England have been consulted on the proposal and raise no objection. Whilst the proposal does result in the loss of the speedway track, it provides new facilities for indoor and outdoor sport. As such the proposal is not considered to fall contrary to policy CFLR1 with regards to sports facilities.’ 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hammer1969 421 Posted September 29, 2023 1 hour ago, Deano said: Can you elaborate please? I can’t find it. I managed to find it after a lot of searching that wasn't easy and there are 32 pages of it and too much for me to read and take in but the words " inappropriate use within the green belt" kept popping up and buildings that were put up but didn't conform to the original plans that the council agreed to. I've pasted the Conclusion below. I would add that although the Council cannot force the speedway to be re-instated I would assume that as it had operated there for many years if someone came along who wants to re-instate it I don't see how the Council could object as they never tried to have it shut it down in the past. Conclusion To conclude the application amounts to inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Further to the harm by inappropriateness, the proposal would provide further harm to the openness of the Green Belt. No very special circumstances exist to outweigh this harm. Furthermore, the proposal is not considered to be within a sustainable location due to the reliance on private vehicles to access the site and the lack of any offer to provide highway improvement works as part of the scheme. The design of the scheme is considered unacceptable due to the level and style of the hardstanding and fencing proposed and due to the lack of any meaningful soft landscaping, the proposal provides insufficient justification for the level of vehicle parking, disabled parking and cycle storage on site, the proposal is considered unacceptable with regards to flood risk, drainage and the impact on the river and insufficient and conflicting information has been provided to demonstrate a biodiversity net gain on site or to demonstrate compliance with climate change and water resource policies. In accordance with the above, it is recommended that permission is refused. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chris 441 Posted September 30, 2023 https://publicaccess.eastherts.gov.uk/online-applications/files/61441642788B2DFCC60005842C620437/pdf/3_21_1522_FUL--2020751.pdf Planning Officer's decision explained. Certainly raises a few questions Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deano 1,318 Posted September 30, 2023 Planning officers in my experience are always negative to speedway. Just to back up previous posters, I think while some kind of track is there, and there’s cash on offer, nothing is impossible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
old bob at herne bay 828 Posted October 1, 2023 :-( No room for speedway on that site again then ...." replaced by other outdoor and indoor sports and recreation facilities of a greater scale." The owners of the site don't have to accommodate speedway just because it used to be there ...... hard to see how a speedway track would fit in with all these new outdoor and indoor sports facilities. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hammer1969 421 Posted October 1, 2023 1 hour ago, old bob at herne bay said: :-( No room for speedway on that site again then ...." replaced by other outdoor and indoor sports and recreation facilities of a greater scale." The owners of the site don't have to accommodate speedway just because it used to be there ...... hard to see how a speedway track would fit in with all these new outdoor and indoor sports facilities. But the question that someone needs to ask East Herts Council is "are you now going to take action against the owners/leaseholders of Rye House who have quite clearly put buildings on the site that do not conform to the plans passed by the Council?" In other words make them remove them or adjust them to comply with the plans they passed. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winstoncigar 23 Posted October 4, 2023 On 10/1/2023 at 2:07 PM, old bob at herne bay said: :-( No room for speedway on that site again then ...." replaced by other outdoor and indoor sports and recreation facilities of a greater scale." The owners of the site don't have to accommodate speedway just because it used to be there ...... hard to see how a speedway track would fit in with all these new outdoor and indoor sports facilities. It’s unlikely that the site owners want speedway back. They’ve got tenants there that certainly wouldn’t. it’s all a bit academic, at the end of the day the cost to revive speedway at Rye House would be so huge it will take a Euro Millions big jackpot winner being a Rockets fan to to make it happen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chris 441 Posted October 22, 2023 On 10/4/2023 at 3:51 PM, winstoncigar said: It’s unlikely that the site owners want speedway back. They’ve got tenants there that certainly wouldn’t. it’s all a bit academic, at the end of the day the cost to revive speedway at Rye House would be so huge it will take a Euro Millions big jackpot winner being a Rockets fan to to make it happen. Through their own stupidity & disregard for planning laws, the leaseholders have put themselves in between a rock & a hard place. Can they afford to wait another couple of years of appeal processes or new plans which may never get through? They must have spunked enough money buying the lease & doing the illegal building work already with only a little bit of rent coming in from the gym & gymnastics club. They have come across as Mickey Mouse the plans they put forward at the start of the planning application & have pissed off the council by extending buildings etc. Can they afford to turn down £40k a year from the speedway? The track could be restored in a couple of months & give them an income fairly quickly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winstoncigar 23 Posted October 29, 2023 I suspect the gym and gymnastics club generate more income for the leaseholders than speedway would and can’t see how they could all work together especially as the leaseholders would appear to have an active dislike for ‘dirty’ speedway. There’s a reason why Uncle Len didn’t sell to the present tenants. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve roberts 9,246 Posted October 29, 2023 Slightly off tangent but whilst on the NYMR last week I spoke to a passenger who was from Hoddesdon and was very aware of Rye House and the present situation and on discussion found out that his great Uncle is Clive Hitch (who is still with us) and son Martin who both rode speedway...I remember watching Clive when riding for the "Robins". 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Goldhawk 76 Posted October 29, 2023 I remember him too Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
