The Rugby Football Union’s bid to stage more concerts at Twickenham has been delivered a blow after local councillors insisted planning permission should not be awarded until the proposal further commits to limiting the impact. The RFU has submitted its planning application to Richmond council to use the stadium for non-sporting events for up to 15 days a year, with a decision due in October. Public consultation was due to end on Thursday with 240 submissions in favour and 456 against at the time of writing.
While the ward councillors based in neighbouring Whitton, St Margarets and North Twickenham do not oppose the idea of the stadium hosting more concerts, they make clear in comments on the application they believe the plan does not do enough to guarantee improvements in infrastructure to cope with the “intensification of use” or mitigate against the effect on local residents. The councillors, who do not sit on the planning committee that will make the decision, highlight transport, road closures and the cumulative effect of more concerts in addition to the sporting events held at Twickenham. They suggest the RFU should fully fund “additional public realm impacts”.
The letter, signed by councillors Katie Mansfield, Maria Margiotta and Jo Humphreys, says: “We recognise the stadium’s importance to Twickenham and accept that some increase in non-sporting events can be appropriate. […] However, we do not believe that the application yet provides sufficient assurance that this intensification of use will be matched by the infrastructure and mitigation necessary to accommodate it, or that all necessary measures will be sufficiently specific, funded and enforceable.” The RFU can host three non-sporting events per year, but has applied for a phased increase to eight, spread over 15 event days, and to increase the maximum capacity from 55,000 to 75,000. The union points out it is a phased increase, with six non-sporting event days in year one and only one in midweek initially. The RFU says Richmond council would have the chance to introduce further mitigation measures as part of an annual operational review that would act as a failsafe mechanism.
The union believes the additional revenue would be crucial in helping to fund the planned £660m overhaul of Twickenham and has previously threatened to relocate if Richmond council does not grant the necessary permission. A document submitted as part of the planning application reads: “if the RFU is unable to generate the revenues required to support the continued development of the game through its activities at Allianz Stadium, it would place increasing pressure on the long‑term sustainability of remaining in Twickenham”. The RFU has also said hosting more concerts would underpin a £500m investment into rugby over the next five years and would generate an extra £86m for the UK economy as well as increase spending in the local area by £28.5m.
The submission by the councillors, which is neither in support nor opposition, but rather an observation, concludes that “we are not opposed to the stadium evolving its role as a major venue, and recognise the significant economic, cultural and wider benefits that this can bring […] However, the current proposal does not demonstrate how the proposed intensification of use will be mitigated by robust, enforceable and funded infrastructure improvements. It should not be approved without the commitments necessary to achieve that.” The RFU points to how Wembley and Tottenham stadium can host 54 and 30 concerts a year respectively while Twickenham is limited to three. Opponents cite the example of the Emirates Stadium, however, and how Arsenal lost a high court battle in 2014 when attempting to increase the number of concerts a year from three to six.
Much of the opposition centres around antisocial behaviour experienced on England matchdays as well as concerns over transport, air quality and noise disturbance. One local resident details in a planning submission how “four aggressive, inebriated gentlemen” stole a For Sale sign from her front garden after a recent England match and, while two reluctantly returned it, they shouted insults as they did so. A petition against the proposal has reached 4,000 signatures, but the west London chamber of commerce has come out in support along with a number of local businesses, demonstrating how polarising the issue is.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
