'Stay at home' local resident told on Wembley event day

Yesterday's tweet alleging that staff from the facilities management company ABM UK had advised a local resident that they should stay at home during the rugby event at the Stadium sums up how many locals feel  - they cannot assume that they can just get on with their daily lives on Wembley event days.

Another resident, wanting to purchase some drink to share with friends in her back garden, found herself thwarted and sent me this email:

Today I know it's event day, but I went to do my weekly shop at Lidl at the Wembley Stadium Retail Park.  Yes, it was full of very well behaved Rugby Fans for the Challenge Cup.  I proceeded to do my shop but whilst the wines and spirits were cordoned off, I still went behind to purchase I bottle of Gin and 2 bottles of wine.  Knowing that I am doing a full shop it cost me £142.57p including a huge sack of dry dog food and 12 cans, 4 cartons of cat food and the rest of my shopping I didn't think it would be a problem, as clearly no-one would be thinking I am going to the Event.  However on getting to the till I was refused purchasing the alcohol because it was in glass bottles ??*!!!****, on asking to speak to the Manager I was informed this is Police and Licensing Policy, I explained that he was clearly misinterpreting the instructions as I was doing my weekly shop and it was clear I would not be going to the Event which was not due to start for another 2 hours. "Oh but it's in glass bottles and we cannot sell it, it's the law" despite my protestations and informing him that this is not the case in Asda, Tesco or Sainsbury's, I am not wearing colours of the teams and clearly not going to the game I was refused service of alcohol.  

 

To say I was not only extremely upset but embarrassed and made to feel stupid, surely this person needs training and should be able to spot the difference, and it wasn't even a football event.  Needless to say, this is an absolute joke, and why as a resident should I be penalised.  Needless to say, I can go and purchase knives from Wilkinson, some very corosive substances from any hardware store, even fireworks should i choose, but no alcohol in glass bottles, what madness is going on in Wembley.  

So in future I will purchase everything else and look forward to causing mayhem outside the stadium as no one is searched before entry.  What madness do I have to endure as a resident of Wembley.  So say I am pissed off doesn't cover it, I have contacted Lidl for clarification and asked why is the manager not using discretion or common sense? and will let you know if they respond.  Please feel free to edit and put up as a blog because this I feel is more nonesense.

The number of days on which local residents will be affected is clear from the list below:

Here are Tottenham's upcoming home Premier League fixtures at Wembley, along with all other Events confirmed to take place at Wembley Stadium, 2017/18 season.

Saturday        26/08/2017  15.00  Rugby Challenge Cup

Sunday          27/08/2017   16:00  Tottenham Hotspur v Burnley

Monday          04/09/2017   19:45  England v Slovakia             

Saturday        16/09/2017   17:30 Tottenham Hotspur v Swansea City

Sunday          24/09/2017   14:30  NFL Ravens v Jaguars

Sunday          01/10/2017   14:30 NFL Saints v Dolphins

Thursday       05/10/2017   19:45 England v Slovenia

Saturday        07/10/2017   12:30 Wembley Cup – Football Skills

Saturday        14/10/2017   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Bournemouth

Sunday          22/10/2017   16:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Liverpool

Sunday          05/11/2017   12:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Crystal Palace

Saturday        25/11/2017   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v West Bromwich Albion

Saturday        09/12/2017   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Stoke City

Wednesday   13/12/2017   20:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Brighton and Hove Albion

Tuesday        26/12/2017   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Southampton

Saturday        30/12/2017   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v West Ham United

Saturday        13/01/2018   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Everton

Wednesday    31/01/2018   20:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Manchester United

Saturday        10/02/2018   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Arsenal

Saturday        03/03/2018   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Huddersfield Town

Saturday        17/03/2018   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Newcastle United

Saturday        14/04/2018   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Manchester City

Saturday        28/04/2018   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Watford

Saturday        05/05/2018   Tbc     Womens FA Cup

Sunday          13/05/2018   15:00 Tottenham Hotspur v Leicester City

Please note the above fixture dates and kick off times are subject to change.

This list does not include FA Cup Games or Champions League fixtures.

This list does not include FA Semi final games or any League Play-off games.

CONFIRMED: Spurs will play all home games at Wembley next season

The Football Association has confirmed that Tottenham Hotspur will play all their home matches at Wembley Stadium next  season. This is despite opposition from local residents to Brent Council's approval of  Wembley National Stadium's application to increase the number of full capacity events at the Stadium.

Tottenham’s chairman, Daniel Levy, said in a statement:

This marks a momentous day in our club’s history as it is the day we formally agreed the demolition of our beloved White Hart Lane. The Lane means a huge amount to each and every one of us and we needed to gain greater certainty on the delivery of the new stadium before we made the final decision to commence with the decommissioning of our iconic, historic home for some 118 years. We shall ensure that we give the Lane a fitting farewell when we play our last match here on May 14.

Wembley will be our home for a season and then we shall return to what will be one of the best stadiums of its kind and the most unique in the world playing host to NFL games too – a stadium that will be key to our future growth and success. Both on and off the pitch this is an incredibly exciting time in the history of our club.

Residents' views absent from offical record of Wembley Stadium Planning Committee meeting

Residents' claims that they were not being heard over the issue of the Wembley Stadium/Tottenham Hotspur planning application to increase the number of full capacity events at the stadium appear to have been borne out by the minutes of the Planning Committee published today.

The minutes merely list the names and organisations of those who made detailed and well-researched presentations to the Planning Committee with not even a summary of what they had to say.The presentations of Chris Bryant for Wembley National stadium Limited and Donna-Maria Cullen of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club are treated in a similar way.

This means that there is no official historical record of both the objections and the undertakings given by the applicants.

I think it is also noteworthy that the written representations of Cllr Butt,  leader of the council and Cllr Ketan Sheth, are not recorded.  As Planning Committee is not livestreamed this means that local residents have no access to what they wrote although they may have influenced the Planning Committee's decision.

These are the minutes as they appear on the Council website LINK:

PROPOSAL:  Proposed variation of condition 3 (event cap, to allow 31 additional full capacity events) and removal of condition 33 (temporary traffic management) of planning permission reference 99/2400, which was for:

Full planning application to consider the complete demolition of Wembley Stadium and clearance of the site to provide a 90,000-seat sports and entertainment stadium (Use Class D2), 4750m2 of office accommodation (Use Class B1), banqueting/conference facilities (Use Class D2), ancillary facilities including catering, restaurant (Use Class A3), retail, kiosks (Use Class A1), toilets and servicing space; re-grading of existing levels within the application site and removal of trees, alteration of existing and provision of new access points (pedestrian and vehicular), and parking for up to 458 coaches, 43 mini-buses and 1,200 cars or 2,900 cars (or combination thereof) including 250 Orange Badge parking spaces.

As approved, condition 3 stated that for two years following completion of the stadium, subject to the completion of specific improvement works to Wembley Park Station and construction of roads known as Estate Access Corridor and Stadium Access Corridor, the number of major sporting events held at the stadium in any one year was restricted to no more than 22 (to exclude European Cup and World Cup events where England/UK is the host nation), and the number of major non-sporting events to 15. After this, additional events over and above this were permitted subject to the number of spectators being limited to the capacity of the lower and middle tiers of the stadium. The proposal would allow for up to an additional 22 major sporting Tottenham Hotspur Football Club (THFC) events between 1 August 2017 and 31 July 2018.

A major event (which may or may not include THFC) would be considered to be an event in the stadium bowl with a capacity in excess of 10,000 people.

The application includes the submission of an Environmental Statement.

RECOMMENDATION:

Resolve to grant planning permission, subject to the completion of a satisfactory deed of variation to the existing Section 106 legal agreement to achieve the matters set out in the report, delegate authority to the Head of Planning to make minor changes to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions, informatives) prior to the decision, provided that the Head of Planning is satisfied that any such changes could not reasonably be regarded as deviating from the overall principle of the decision reached by the Committee nor that such change(s) could reasonably have led to a different decision having been reached by the committee.

David Glover (Area Planning Manager) introduced the proposal and responded to members’ questions.  He referenced the supplementary report which provided additional detail on some of the mitigation measures proposed, and some additional measures beyond what was contained within the main committee report. In his view the measures amplified in the main and supplementary reports would assist to mitigate the impacts of the greater number of major events which the application proposed. He added that Section 106 financial contributions were secured in the original planning consent. 

Dr Ruth Kosmin spoke on behalf of Barnhill Residents’ Association (BHRA) objecting to the proposal.

Dr Michael Calderbank objected to the proposal on behalf of Wembley Park Residents’ Association.

Denise Cheong representing Wembley Champions also spoke in objection to the proposal.

D Bablas on behalf of Wembley High Road Businesses Association also spoke in objection to the proposal.

Fatima-Karim Khaku representing BHRA also spoke in objection to the proposal.

In accordance with the provisions of the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Choudhary, ward member, stated that he had been approached by members of BHRA. Councillor Choudhary objected to the proposal on the grounds that it did not contain adequate information to assess the environmental, transport and business impacts.  He added that in addition to increased anti-social behaviour, the proposal would put a strain on the road network in the area.

In accordance with the provisions of the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Stopp stated that he had been approached by local residents. Councillor Stopp stated that the potential benefits of the proposal would be outweighed by the costs to the area including fear of anti-social behaviour and increased litter (evidenced by the increase in the caseload from his constituents) and undesirable precedent.

Alice Lester (Head of Planning) read out in full, the written statements submitted by Councillors Butt and Ketan Sheth (ward members).

Chris Bryant representing Wembley National Stadium Limited (WNSL) addressed the Committee, answered members’ questions.

Donna-Maria Cullen on behalf of THFC addressed the Committee in similar terms and answered members’ questions.  

In the ensuing discussion, members questioned the applicants on a number of issues including search for alternative venues, the weight placed on residents’ views, measures they would take to reduce impact on local traders, transport and amenity impacts and the cost of policing.  Members heard that following a wide ranging search, Wembley Stadium was identified as the most preferred site that would suit the needs and aspirations of THFC.  The applicants continued that as a direct result of local views, full capacity events had been revised to 22 and that attending fans would be given a directory of local traders where they could shop.  They reiterated the mitigation measures to address the transport and amenity impacts.

Tony Kennedy and John Fletcher from the Council’s from Highways and Transportation outlined additional measures to reduce transport impact.   

DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended.

(Voting: For 6; Against 1; Abstention 0)

Note:  The Committee voted to disapply the guillotine procedure to enable members to continue consideration of the application beyond 10:00pm.

Supporting documents:

Haringey Council's subsidy to Spurs revealed as Brent Council leader meets concerned residents

Wembley Champions, the residents and small businesses umbrella group that fought against the 'Twin Towers' that is to replace Chesterfield House at the junction of Park Lane and Wembley High Road and also opposed the increase in full capacity events at Wembley Stadium, are to meet with the leader of the Council and senior officers about their concerns about developments in Wembley with a vew to a public meeting later. LINK

Wembley high rise building from the stadium ramp

 Meanwhile Spurs has been given an extension of the deadline to sign up for the Wembley Stadium and must now agree the deal by April 30th. Spurs chairman, Daniel Levy, has suggested that due to delays in getting the construction of the new Spurs stadium underway that the team may play their home games at White Hart Lane next season.  Chelsea waits in the wings...

During the planning application debate the applicants stressed the financial advantage to local businesses of more high capacity events (not shared by the High Road Business Association) and there were suggestions that the deal would also be advantageous to the Council and thus to council tax payers.

However a Freedom of Information request to Haringey Council suggests that the traffic is not all one way LINK:

Public Subsidy to Tottenham Hotspur:

In February 2012, Cabinet approved a £27m Funding and Investment Package for North Tottenham. The funding comprised of £18m of funding from the Greater London Authority (GLA) and £9m funding from the council. This included a decision to allocate £8m of funding for ‘public realm and heritage improvements’ linked to the Northumberland Development Project (the new stadium and associated development currently underway by Tottenham Hotspur) scheme.

Via a Cabinet Member Decision to be taken in April 2017, we will be seeking approval to enter into formal grant agreements with THFC to contribute £7.5m (£500,000 of the £8m funding has previously been used to contribute to the North Tottenham Heritage Initiative) for the public realm and heritage improvement works Tottenham Hotspur Football Club (THFC) will be undertaking as part of the NDP scheme.

Since February 2012, the Council has also undertaken the following funding transactions with THFC:

§  £32,898 to THFC for services such as room hire
§  £644,215 to the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation (THFC’s charitable
foundation)  for the delivery of programmes relating to health, social
care, community development, education and employment
§  £4,000 to Tottenham Hotspur Ladies Football Club for sports and activity programmes

You can access a copy of the original 2012 Cabinet report in the Cabinet meeting pack here:
[1]http://www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk/docum...
The report specific to the funding package for Tottenham Hotspur can be found on page 143 of the document (page 149 of the pdf)

'Remind me, please, who is our local Council meant to serve?' - Brent Council propaganda on Wembley Stadium condemned

Brent Council's celebratory announcement of the approval of the Wembley Stadium - Tottenham Hotsput planning application to increase the number of full capacity events at Wembley Stadium has drawn stinging criticism.

Cllr John Warren has written to fellow councillors:

Am I the only member appalled at the "celebratory " tone of the Your Brent piece on the Wembley Stadium / Spurs planning approval on the Brent website?

The piece mentions the "extensive consultation process, "but is completely silent on the results of that consultation! Our intelligence is then insulted by a quote from a Brent Council spokesman, who speaks about a " balance being struck." What balance?

It is complete propaganda...and why are we celebrating a decision which offends a very large number of our residents? The phrase "rubbing salt in the wound " springs to mind.

Cllr John Warren

On Friday Philip Grant on a comment on this  blog wrote:

It is sickening that, this morning, Brent Council's website has a banner headline celebrating Spurs being given full capacity use of Wembley Stadium, linked to a Council press release about the Planning Committee decision which does not mention the objections made by local residents and businesses:
https://www.brent.gov.uk/council-news/press-releases/pr6556/

Remind me, please, who is our local Council meant to serve?

... and then, to add insult to injury, at 1pm today the Council emailed me "Spurs are on their way to Wembley!", a copy of the latest "Your Brent" digital news-sheet, with the same banner headline celebrating the Planning Committee decision.

But this is a very distorted news report, because it makes no mention of the very valid objections put forward to the committee, by local people and some councillors on behalf of their residents.

It is as if the Council's press release reporting the decision was prepared before the Planning Committee meeting took place, which it probably was!

Philip Grant

This is the Council's statement. complete with an image of celebratory fountains, posted on its website on the evening of March 23rd - the day of the Planning Committee:

Temporary increase to full capacity events at Wembley Stadium approved

23 March 2017

An application from the FA/Wembley National Stadium Ltd to temporarily increase the number of full capacity events at Wembley Stadium has been agreed by Brent Council's Planning Committee this evening (March 23).

The decision, which follows an extensive consultation process, paves the way for 22 additional full capacity events for Tottenham Hotspur Football Club matches, of up to 90,000 fans to take place at the stadium between August 2017 and July 2018.

Under current rules there is no limit on the number of events that can be held at a maximum capacity of 51,000.

It is understood that Tottenham Hotspur are set to make the national stadium their temporary home while their new ground at White Hart Lane is developed.

Wembley had originally requested permission for an additional 31 full capacity events but this was reduced to 22 prior to the application coming to committee. The application has now been approved subject to a number of additional measures being put in place, including ones designed to deal with the impacts of increased numbers of people in the area. These include controlling parking and traffic, signage, street cleaning, event management and control of public safety including aspects such as alcohol sale and street trading. The Committee heard from objectors and the applicant before making their decision.

A Brent Council spokesperson said: "Wembley Stadium is a highly valued part of our borough bringing visitors from around the world. We are pleased that a balance has been struck between recognising the impact on local residents and businesses whilst enabling the Stadium to make good use of its facilities and support a London club to operate in the capital while their ground is being redeveloped."

"We look forward to working closely with the Stadium, the Football Association and Tottenham Hotspur Football Club in the forthcoming year both on the management of events and their work in the local community that they outlined in their application."

Hear what Brent residents and councillors said at the Planning Commitee on Wembley Stadium application

If you missed the Brent Planning Committee that approved Wembley Stadium/Tottenham's request for more high capacity events at Wembley Stadium you can get a flavour from the sound file below.

Speakers in order were:

RESIDENTS
Dr Ruth Kosmin, Barn Hill Residents' Asssociation and an economist (0.10)
Dr Michael Calderbank, Wembley Park Residents' Association (8.40)
Denise Cheong, Wembley Champions (15.00)
Niral Babla, Wembley High Road Business Association (25.14)
Fatema Karim-Khaku, Barn Hill Residents Association  and transport consultant (30.44)

COUNCILLORS
Cllr Shafiq Choudhary (Barn Hill ward) (36.50)
Cllr Sam Stopp (Wembley Central ward) (43.40)

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY COUNCILLORS
Cllr Ketan Sheth (59.50)
Cllr Muhammed Butt (102.12)

Wembley Stadium 'Goliath' wins against local residents

Rob Davies did not receive notification that his request had been granted. The Chair refused a substitute from the same residents' association

Despite some excellent well-researched speeches by supporters of local umbrella group 'Wembley Champions', Barn Hill Residents' Association and Wembley High Road Traders' Association,  Brent Planning Committee tonight approved Wembley Stadium/Spurs planning application for 22 additional full capacity (91,000)  events per year with only one councillor voting against.

Earlier it had looked more evenly balanced when councillors asked some searching questions about the application and mitigation measures with Wembley Stadium often floundering in response. Councillors appeared to be very  doubtful of the benefits for local people and concerned about a capacity increase of some 60,000 spectators and the subsequent impact on traffic, train and bus over-crowding, littering and anti-social behaviour.

However after another confusion over whether the Committee could defer the decision, with the wrong legal advice being given at first to say they couldn't, there was a short break.  After the break they were informed that they could defer after all (this after a member of the public showed them a copy  of the law), but no councillor moved a motion to do so and a straight vote was taken  for or against the officer's  recommendation of approval.

Cllrs J Mitchell-Murray, Moher, Maurice, Long, Kabir and Agha all voted for the increase in the number of events and increased capacity despite all their early scepticism. Outgoing Kilburn councillor Cllr Pitruzzella, who had asked some challenging questions of the stadium team, was the only one to vote against. She will be a great loss to honest Brent politics.

Unusually written statements were read out from Cllr Muhammed Butt (he'd decided not to attend the meeting) and Cllr Ketan Sheth. Butt claimed that on balance the application would be good for local people.

Usually when non-committee councillors make representations, as was the case with Cllr Stopp and Cllr Choudhary, they are asked to declare any interest and reveal any approaches that have been made to them - this was not the case with the written statements.

Wembley Stadium's last minute lobby of Brent councillors with glossy PR brochure on planning application

If the David and Goliath nature of the battle between local residents and Wembley stadium over the increase in the number of events and increase in capacity proposed during Tottenham Hotspur's stay at the stadium needed any further it is exemplified by a brochure that Wembley stadium has sent to all Brent councillors and Alice Lester, David Glover and Chris Heather in the Brent Planning Department.

The Stadium has full-time advisers and public relations officers spearheading their campaign while residents rely on their own resources and campaign in the free time available after they have done their jobs.

In an email to councillors and officers, Chris Bryant, Wembley Stadium head of operations says:

I contacted you on 26 January 2017 regarding our proposals and planning application for Wembley Stadium to host Tottenham Hotspur Football Club during the 2017/18 season, to enable the development of their new ground in Tottenham to be completed.

Since that time Wembley Stadium and Tottenham Hotspur (THFC) have been through an extensive period of consultation and discussion with the local community, key stakeholders and your officers. The Council itself has sent out around 41,000 consultation letters.

During our discussions we have obtained a much better understanding of the impact on local residents and businesses that additional events at the Stadium will have. Some will be negative, others positive. We recognise there are aspects of the event day management that can be improved, including closer partnership working with the Council and THFC. We have also learnt from the European games THFC has recently played at Wembley.

Consequently, as well as reducing the total number of additional games sought during the temporary period (August 2017 to July 2018) from 31 to 22 in response to public, stakeholder and officer feedback, we have also discussed and agreed with officers an extensive package of mitigation measures for all the additional full capacity THFC events. Many of the initiatives included are in addition to our existing commitments, which are ongoing. These will be secured by a legal agreement.

In addition, THFC has outlined an extensive package of community measures, which will be delivered through the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation during its tenancy. The Foundation has already made a significant positive impact in Haringey, Enfield, Barnet and Waltham Forest, and would extend its programme to Brent residents for the coming year if THFC is hosted at Wembley.  Details of the agreed mitigation measures and the work of the Foundation are provided in the enclosed brochure for your information.

Wembley Stadium has valued the longstanding support of Brent Council since before even the initial bid for the new Stadium and associated local regeneration was made in the 1990s and we welcome the officer’s recommendation to grant planning permission.

We look forward to working with the Council and THFC over the coming year and beyond and will be asking the Planning Committee to support a temporary variation of the event cap. We ask you to please consider the enclosed information. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

Here is the brochure sent with the email:

Planning Officers maintain their support for Stadium Planning Application in Supplementary Report

A supplementary report has been published on the eve of Thursday's Planning Committee. LINK It contains more information on mitigation. The Officers maintain their support for the planning application.

Following completion of the committee report, a further 24 letters of representation have been received. Where additional issues have been raised they are noted below, otherwise they are considered to have been dealt with in the main report.

One letter of support

The issues raised are considered to have been addressed within the main report.

23 letters of objection

Objection from one representation citing insufficient notice of the committee, and a request for an additional 3 weeks instead. Also, confusion over when the committee is due to take place. Concern that the additional number of events would result in the roads deteriorating.

The notice period given is considered reasonable and in accordance with the Council’s procedures. There was an error on the earlier communication which stated that the Committee would begin at 7pm and this was corrected last week. The proposal would result in additional journeys, but the mitigation in place is intended to reduce the number of cars as far as possible.

Request for clarification on the need for a section 106 legal agreement, and whether parking permits within the event day management zone would remain free.

A section 106 legal agreement is absolutely necessary to the acceptability of the proposal. 


The current charge for a parking permit is £10. The proposal would not change this. 


Concern about the noise from helicopters, which would be increased with a greater number of events. 


Helicopters can be associated with large events as part of the police operation. The height at which they fly or hover will inevitably vary, and hence so will the noise they generate. However, this is considered to be infrequent and for short periods of time. It is not considered that this alone would increase the level of noise to the point that it is considered unacceptable.

Other issues raised are considered to have been addressed within the main report.

Mitigation

The committee report identified a number of mitigation measures which would be secured within the section 106 legal agreement. Further detail is provided on a number of the additional measures which are proposed over and above those secured through the original agreement dated 23 August 2002. A number of them were detailed within the main report and so are not detailed further. These additional measures to cover individual events are proposed to apply only to the 22 additional major events. They are not proposed to apply to 37 high capacity (51,000-90,000 capacity ) events that can take place under the existing condition.

Event by event mitigation measures, for the additional 22 events proposed

Regulation of Public Safety – The Council’s reasonable costs would be met as part of the application on an event-by-event basis, which would be on a similar basis to what is currently done for street cleaning and the regulation of traffic management. This involves a requirement to attend pre-match meetings and monitoring safety documentation for each event. Inspections would take place (in addition to those which take place during existing major events) to monitor the measures and seek to refine the process. 


Alcohol licensing inspections – This would also be related to the Council’s reasonable costs, similar to the regulation of public safety. This involves inspecting licensed premises prior to an event and follow up visits afterwards if there have been complaints. 


Illegal street trader – This was highlighted in the list within the main committee report. This is proposed to be removed from the Section 106 legal agreement, but only because there has already been a mechanism established for the previous 4 Tottenham Hotspur events that have taken place at Wembley, which is proposed to continue. 


Anti ticket tout initiative – This would also be related to the Council’s reasonable costs, similar to the regulation of public safety. Ticket touts are a feature of many sporting events, and can lead to people being denied the opportunity to view sporting events at a reasonable cost. Touts can obstruct public areas and introduce an element of intimidation. 
One-off contribution mitigation measures: 


Pirate parking initiative – More than £47,000 has been secured to ensure that the existing scheme can 
continue. The intention is to ensure that parking on land which does not have planning permission for that purpose is addressed, so reducing the number of persons using cars and increasing the number of persons using public transport. 


Additional CCTV camera – This was detailed in the main report. The cost for this would be £22,779. 
In addition, further measures are proposed to those detailed within the main committee report. 


Litter bins – In response to a number of objections there would be a contribution of £20,000 for litter bins 
in and around the stadium and Wembley Town Centre. 


Radio system and protective clothing – This would ensure that the current equipment (which is 
leading to some problems with communication) is replaced by more advanced equipment. This would improve the event day operations, by improving communication when setting up road closures and managing traffic. Ultimately, this would assist in the safe and efficient arrival and departure from events at the stadium. This would be £50,000. 


Event day signage – Following an audit of the existing signage a contribution of £60,000 is proposed to improvements, to be secured before the 2017/18 season. This would include a more detailed audit to identify broken signage and identify where more signage is required. There would be maintenance of existing Variable-Message Signs (VMS) and event day flap signs. Additional signage would be provided in areas with insufficient signage. 
Reference has been had to the tests of whether a section 106 obligation is considered justifiable. As required by Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Regulations 2010 (as amended) a planning obligation may only constitute a reason for granting planning permission if it is: 
(a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (b) directly related to the development; and
(c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. 
The obligations above, and those which are listed and detailed in the main report, are considered to pass 
these tests. They are proposed to maintain the existing levels of mitigation for the existing major events (as secured in the original section 106 legal agreement), and to go further for the additional major events proposed by this application.

Update on Tottenham Hotspur

Since the committee report was finalised there have been additional games played. As of 22 March 2017 there are 10 games remaining for Tottenham Hotspur in the Premier League. They remain well placed to be in European competition next year (specifically the group stage of the Champions League). They remain in the FA Cup, which has reached the semi-final stage. This is not considered to change the assumptions on the numbers of games they are likely to play next season.

Conclusion

The additional comments received raise some additional points, which are not considered to change the recommendation. Many of the issues have been raised previously, and are considered to have been addressed in the main report.

This supplementary report provides additional detail on some of the mitigation measures proposed, and some additional measures which go beyond what is contained within the main committee report. They are welcomed and would assist to mitigate the impacts of the greater number of major events which this application proposes.

Recommendation: Remains approval as set out within the committee report