Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
M!llwall looking to build their new training ground in West Kingsdown???
Comments
-
I vaguely remember when the Portobello had a swimming pool. My mum & dad had an all night party at home and the next morning we all went swimming in the pool at the Portobello. This was probably in the late 60s.0
-
I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.5 -
But losing SE London.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.1 -
That’s still within 60 minutesCovered End said:
But losing SE London.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.2 -
Not if some 'gilets jaunes' come out and block the roads.😉Swisdom said:
That’s still within 60 minutesCovered End said:
But losing SE London.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.2 -
Planning is not a referendum. Residents’ views count but won’t override other material planning considerations. Can’t see any legally sustainable grounds for refusal - or that it matters.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.2 -
They'll lose other parts of London thenSwisdom said:
That’s still within 60 minutesCovered End said:
But losing SE London.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.
I've no idea anyway how they calculate what places are within an hour anyway, as it's so dependant on traffic or public transport and the time of day.0 -
Surely the land being Greenbelt is a reason for refusal - the Council website has a warning on it about Greenbelt land sales https://www.sevenoaks.gov.uk/info/20008/planning/524/warning_on_green_belt_land_salesAirman Brown said:
Planning is not a referendum. Residents’ views count but won’t override other material planning considerations. Can’t see any legally sustainable grounds for refusal - or that it matters.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.
Note that Millwall are quoted as saying land is adjacent to the Greenbelt - that is incorrect, the land is within the Greenbelt0 -
Traffic can be horrendous around there....any problems on the M25 completely stuff the area up.killerandflash said:
They'll lose other parts of London thenSwisdom said:
That’s still within 60 minutesCovered End said:
But losing SE London.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.
I've no idea anyway how they calculate what places are within an hour anyway, as it's so dependant on traffic or public transport and the time of day.0 -
paving the way for the New Nou Den….lord lucan is going to have to move again0
- Sponsored links:
-
West Kingsdown is little affected by problems occurring on either the M25 or M20.HastingsRed said:
Traffic can be horrendous around there....any problems on the M25 completely stuff the area up.killerandflash said:
They'll lose other parts of London thenSwisdom said:
That’s still within 60 minutesCovered End said:
But losing SE London.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.
I've no idea anyway how they calculate what places are within an hour anyway, as it's so dependant on traffic or public transport and the time of day.
I had a business in West Kingsdown for a number of years until 6 years ago.I cannot remember traffic problems on the A20 at any time, apart from the odd accident or road works here and there.3 -
MillwallFan said:
Five or ten minute drive from a few stations that have direct and fast links to London. Probably have a full time mini bus to pick up people as and when needed. No biggy. The futures bright… the futures blue 😉SoundAsa£ said:How are people expected to get there by public transport, there is none that goes nearby and what there is, is very infrequent?
Juniors, young players and staff with no driving licences will be absolutely stuffed.Crazy location! 🤨SE10Addick said:SoundAsa£ said:Not an easy place to get to for their youngsters who don’t yet drive using public transport.
Have they thought that through?
Some of their fans will be able to walk there from the Ash campsite though.
11 -
Of course, I'm thinking more Dartford area, A2 etc.SoundAsa£ said:
West Kingsdown is little affected by problems occurring on either the M25 or M20.HastingsRed said:
Traffic can be horrendous around there....any problems on the M25 completely stuff the area up.killerandflash said:
They'll lose other parts of London thenSwisdom said:
That’s still within 60 minutesCovered End said:
But losing SE London.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.
I've no idea anyway how they calculate what places are within an hour anyway, as it's so dependant on traffic or public transport and the time of day.
I had a business in West Kingsdown for a number of years until 6 years ago.I cannot remember traffic problems on the A20 at any time, apart from the odd accident or road works here and there.1 -
Departure from the local plan is a valid reason for refusal, but it can be overcome and the question for the council is whether it has been. Charlton’s academy scheme was itself a departure from the local plan (Sparrows Lane is protected as Metropolitan Open Land) but that isn’t the only thing taken into account - the extent of the departure is important and any mitigation is a consideration. Economic or community benefits can be taken into account. Facilities that are ancillary to the existing land use (for example changing accommodation) are likely to be acceptable if proportionate and well designed to mitigate visual impact. A major increase in traffic on a minor road or disruption to residential property would be proper considerations against. So is loss of agricultural land but that can depend on its quality.Lordflashheart said:
Surely the land being Greenbelt is a reason for refusal - the Council website has a warning on it about Greenbelt land sales https://www.sevenoaks.gov.uk/info/20008/planning/524/warning_on_green_belt_land_salesAirman Brown said:
Planning is not a referendum. Residents’ views count but won’t override other material planning considerations. Can’t see any legally sustainable grounds for refusal - or that it matters.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.
Note that Millwall are quoted as saying land is adjacent to the Greenbelt - that is incorrect, the land is within the Greenbelt
The public response would be used to help gauge the importance of such factors, but “no one here wants it” isn’t likely to get much weight in an appeal - and ultimately an inspector can always overrule the council if its decision is deemed unreasonable in planning terms. The council would be wary of losing an appeal as it might then have to pay costs.1 -
Yeah Im not sure the "I dont like Millwall, can they not build stuff near me please?" argument will hold much weight.1
-
Definitely there is an issue with the vehicle access here - it’s a country lane, with 2 acute bends in it right next to the proposed siteAirman Brown said:
Departure from the local plan is a valid reason for refusal, but it can be overcome and the question for the council is whether it has been. Charlton’s academy scheme was itself a departure from the local plan (Sparrows Lane is protected as Metropolitan Open Land) but that isn’t the only thing taken into account - the extent of the departure is important and any mitigation is a consideration. Economic or community benefits can be taken into account. Facilities that are ancillary to the existing land use (for example changing accommodation) are likely to be acceptable if proportionate and well designed to mitigate visual impact. A major increase in traffic on a minor road or disruption to residential property would be proper considerations against. So is loss of agricultural land but that can depend on its quality.Lordflashheart said:
Surely the land being Greenbelt is a reason for refusal - the Council website has a warning on it about Greenbelt land sales https://www.sevenoaks.gov.uk/info/20008/planning/524/warning_on_green_belt_land_salesAirman Brown said:
Planning is not a referendum. Residents’ views count but won’t override other material planning considerations. Can’t see any legally sustainable grounds for refusal - or that it matters.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.
Note that Millwall are quoted as saying land is adjacent to the Greenbelt - that is incorrect, the land is within the Greenbelt
The public response would be used to help gauge the importance of such factors, but “no one here wants it” isn’t likely to get much weight in an appeal - and ultimately an inspector can always overrule the council if its decision is deemed unreasonable in planning terms. The council would be wary of losing an appeal as it might then have to pay costs.
Agricultural value is I think low - I can’t recall when anything was last grown on it, although I maybe wrong
I know that the London Golf Club had difficulties getting planning permission for their hotel (still not built), with Sevenoaks Council very anti - the golf club is part in Sevenoaks and part in Tonbridge & Malling, so they changed their plans so that the hotel was only on land within Tonbridge & Malling, and it got agreed3 -
So the council might ask the club to pay for highway improvements in mitigation. KCC are the statutory consultee on highways and what they say would carry considerable weight on that issue.Lordflashheart said:
Definitely there is an issue with the vehicle access here - it’s a country lane, with 2 acute bends in it right next to the proposed siteAirman Brown said:
Departure from the local plan is a valid reason for refusal, but it can be overcome and the question for the council is whether it has been. Charlton’s academy scheme was itself a departure from the local plan (Sparrows Lane is protected as Metropolitan Open Land) but that isn’t the only thing taken into account - the extent of the departure is important and any mitigation is a consideration. Economic or community benefits can be taken into account. Facilities that are ancillary to the existing land use (for example changing accommodation) are likely to be acceptable if proportionate and well designed to mitigate visual impact. A major increase in traffic on a minor road or disruption to residential property would be proper considerations against. So is loss of agricultural land but that can depend on its quality.Lordflashheart said:
Surely the land being Greenbelt is a reason for refusal - the Council website has a warning on it about Greenbelt land sales https://www.sevenoaks.gov.uk/info/20008/planning/524/warning_on_green_belt_land_salesAirman Brown said:
Planning is not a referendum. Residents’ views count but won’t override other material planning considerations. Can’t see any legally sustainable grounds for refusal - or that it matters.Swisdom said:I attended the local resident’s initial consultation. They are not happy and there was a lot of resistance. Millwall did keep banging on about their community trust and how wonderful it would be for the local schools but this didn’t seem to wash for the residents.
the plan is to transport the academy players in and out of the facility and not rely on public transport
the option was for it to be ready to be a cat 1 academy but not the initial plan. If they are successful they can adapt easily but to start with it was staying as cat 2.
worryingly the eppp stipulates players in the academy can’t travel more than an hour to attend so by moving they are now picking up a large portion of Kent as their catchment area.
Note that Millwall are quoted as saying land is adjacent to the Greenbelt - that is incorrect, the land is within the Greenbelt
The public response would be used to help gauge the importance of such factors, but “no one here wants it” isn’t likely to get much weight in an appeal - and ultimately an inspector can always overrule the council if its decision is deemed unreasonable in planning terms. The council would be wary of losing an appeal as it might then have to pay costs.
Agricultural value is I think low - I can’t recall when anything was last grown on it, although I maybe wrong
I know that the London Golf Club had difficulties getting planning permission for their hotel (still not built), with Sevenoaks Council very anti - the golf club is part in Sevenoaks and part in Tonbridge & Malling, so they changed their plans so that the hotel was only on land within Tonbridge & Malling, and it got agreed1 -
I would think that Millwall or anyone else having a well maintained and visually acceptable training ground on that land would be a good thing for the locals. It’s not going to attract thousands of people and most of the time it will be quiet or empty. Better perhaps than having a housing development at some future point. If the land is not being used to any great extent now then going forward I would imagine housing would be at least applied for at some point. I know what I’d prefer.5
-
Agreed SHG, as I said in September.Covered End said:I can't see why residents would object.
Footballers training is a far better prospect than houses, if planning permission was permitted over the course of time.1 -
It's highly likely that Millwall will have had pre-application advice from the council and/or a planning consultant advising them.1
- Sponsored links:
-
I've only got one thing really to say about the subject of this thread and Millwall's plans to develop a world leading academy with Cat 1 EPPP status:
A f*ck I could not give.2 -
With Palace already having Category 1 and with Millwall aspiring to Category 1 then quite honestly I do give a fuck. I know it’s also on Charltons radar but as a club we really don’t want to be left squeezed by those two.bobmunro said:I've only got one thing really to say about the subject of this thread and Millwall's plans to develop a world leading academy with Cat 1 EPPP status:
A f*ck I could not give.4 -
Honest post. Of course Bob gives a f***. If he really didn’t he wouldn’t have even commented. And I know I would if it was the other way around.ShootersHillGuru said:
With Palace already having Category 1 and with Millwall aspiring to Category 1 then quite honestly I do give a fuck. I know it’s also on Charltons radar but as a club we really don’t want to be left squeezed by those two.bobmunro said:I've only got one thing really to say about the subject of this thread and Millwall's plans to develop a world leading academy with Cat 1 EPPP status:
A f*ck I could not give.0 -
Yes, but that's for us to sort out - what the spanners and nigels do doesn't impact on what we have to do.ShootersHillGuru said:
With Palace already having Category 1 and with Millwall aspiring to Category 1 then quite honestly I do give a fuck. I know it’s also on Charltons radar but as a club we really don’t want to be left squeezed by those two.bobmunro said:I've only got one thing really to say about the subject of this thread and Millwall's plans to develop a world leading academy with Cat 1 EPPP status:
A f*ck I could not give.0 -
NIMBY - No irritating Millwall b******s yet1
-
Will the planning meeting "kick off"?0
-
I’m hearing that Kent Police are requesting a purpose built 24 hours fully manned sub station, to include 20 high speck detention cells.
I assume (or hope that), The Spanners will have to foot the bill…..or at least a significant percentage towards the build and ongoing running costs……and rightly so.1 -
Be more bothered if they were building all this on our patch / the suburbs - got a ground miles away from 90% of their fans and will now have a training ground in the middle of nowhere - seems good to me0
-
Do you really think that Palace and Millwall both having Category 1 academies doesn’t impact on what Charlton do ? It would be a disaster.bobmunro said:
Yes, but that's for us to sort out - what the spanners and nigels do doesn't impact on what we have to do.ShootersHillGuru said:
With Palace already having Category 1 and with Millwall aspiring to Category 1 then quite honestly I do give a fuck. I know it’s also on Charltons radar but as a club we really don’t want to be left squeezed by those two.bobmunro said:I've only got one thing really to say about the subject of this thread and Millwall's plans to develop a world leading academy with Cat 1 EPPP status:
A f*ck I could not give.2 -
The majority of our ST holders are still SE London based.DOUCHER said:Be more bothered if they were building all this on our patch / the suburbs - got a ground miles away from 90% of their fans and will now have a training ground in the middle of nowhere - seems good to meI’d say charlton probably have a higher percentage of fans who live in kent and beyond and miles away from their ground. I rarely meet charlton fans in SE London these days.3
