Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Wimbledon


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 53466
Date:
RE: Wimbledon


Madadman wrote:
Lambda wrote:

The AELTC's Wimbledon Park proposals go before the council planning committee tonight with a recommendation to approve subject to numerous obligations provided through a S106 agreement.


 Stu Fraser is running a Twitter thread on it.

https://twitter.com/stu_fraser/status/1717604480567402871?s=46&t=HQ-l_ZmPv-CnAm8WRXRGZA


Planning permission granted by Merton Council by a majority of 6-4.  Further approval still required (Wandsworth Council, Mayor of London's office & conceivably the planning inspectorate at national level).  Stu Fraser's article in The Times.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 52627
Date:

But planners have recommended to Wandsworth Council to refuse the plan

www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/nov/13/wimbledon-expansion-plan-planners-stadium-show-court

__________________


Futures level

Status: Offline
Posts: 1869
Date:

As with Merton, the application is an 'inappropriate development ' for designated Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) and permission can only be granted if 'Very Special Circumstances ' have been met, defined as the needs of the development are justified and benefits outweigh the harm.

It seems to me from reading through the VSC section that the officers have identified a number of significant and limited benefits, but they are not persuaded on the need for the development.

On the needs of the development, Wandsworth officers have advised that
* It has not been demonstrated why qualifying needs to be at the main site and cannot be held elsewhere
* It is accepted that the current third show court is the smallest of the grand slams and presents scheduling difficulties, but it has not been demonstrated that the show court is needed to support junior and amateur tennis tournaments, nor has it been demonstrated why the show court needs to be a permanent structure and cannot be a temporary structure given its limited use each year
* It is acknowledged that existing practice court facilities are inadequate and there is insufficient space on the existing site to provide additional practice facilities, but it has not been demonstrated that alternative locations for practice facilities were considered and why practice facilities need to be in this location.
* It is acknowledged that to accommodate the main draw, wheelchair and junior qualifying as well as the main draw qualifying, wheelchair and junior championships more courts are necessary for the scale of events that the AELTC envisions, but the AELTC indicate the courts in this application would allow for a reduction in courts on the existing site to aid crowd flow and this cannot be a justification for development on MOL.
* It is not clear why there needs to be 4 additional courts for the main draw
* No indication of player numbers have been provided as to whether fewer courts would be possible.


__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 52627
Date:

Interesting points they make there, Lambda - thanks for posting it

__________________


Top national player

Status: Offline
Posts: 3523
Date:

Interesting, Wandsworth council actually covers the site that the Qualifying tournament takes place.

__________________


Futures level

Status: Offline
Posts: 1869
Date:

Unanimously rejected by Wandsworth. This will now go to the Mayor of London's office, although apparently Sadiq has recused himself so it will be a deputy that makes the decision.

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 36072
Date:

Lambda wrote:

Unanimously rejected by Wandsworth. This will now go to the Mayor of London's office, although apparently Sadiq has recused himself so it will be a deputy that makes the decision.


" Hoi, mate, fancy a lifetime debenture as a nice gift from us. Oh, and you couldnt see your way to signing it off, could you??"



__________________
Var


Club Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:

Lambda wrote:

As with Merton, the application is an 'inappropriate development ' for designated Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) and permission can only be granted if 'Very Special Circumstances ' have been met, defined as the needs of the development are justified and benefits outweigh the harm.

It seems to me from reading through the VSC section that the officers have identified a number of significant and limited benefits, but they are not persuaded on the need for the development.

On the needs of the development, Wandsworth officers have advised that
* It has not been demonstrated why qualifying needs to be at the main site and cannot be held elsewhere
* It is accepted that the current third show court is the smallest of the grand slams and presents scheduling difficulties, but it has not been demonstrated that the show court is needed to support junior and amateur tennis tournaments, nor has it been demonstrated why the show court needs to be a permanent structure and cannot be a temporary structure given its limited use each year
* It is acknowledged that existing practice court facilities are inadequate and there is insufficient space on the existing site to provide additional practice facilities, but it has not been demonstrated that alternative locations for practice facilities were considered and why practice facilities need to be in this location.
* It is acknowledged that to accommodate the main draw, wheelchair and junior qualifying as well as the main draw qualifying, wheelchair and junior championships more courts are necessary for the scale of events that the AELTC envisions, but the AELTC indicate the courts in this application would allow for a reduction in courts on the existing site to aid crowd flow and this cannot be a justification for development on MOL.
* It is not clear why there needs to be 4 additional courts for the main draw
* No indication of player numbers have been provided as to whether fewer courts would be possible.


 Thanks, Lambda. I can't grasp the need for this TBH. Qualifying at Roehampton has worked OK in the past - why not develop that site? Also, as the number of players in the Grand Slam is set and can't be altered, why are 4 more courts needed if it has worked OK previously or are they mining this tournament to the last buck!? It seems to me we would be better off developing an indoors permanent world-class hard court centre that could attract top ATP and WTA challenger etc tournaments year-round, to give our players a better chance at entry and gaining ranking points. at the end of the day, Wimbledon is one fortnight a year.



__________________
VRoberts


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 52627
Date:

I agree, Var

Of course it would be lovely to expand Wimbledon and have more spacious facilities, allow the qualifiers to play there (supposedly it's only really the players who care) etc etc

But there's no free lunch and it has to be balanced against the interests of everyone else

And you certainly can't say it's a MAJOR problem as is, when it's been successfully running each year, at a big profit.

__________________
«First  <  144 45 46 | Page of 46  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard