“Dumfounded” Hatters chief executive Gary Sweet is in the dark over why Luton Council have blocked a new domed academy plan and has called on Luton fans to contact their councillors for an explanation.
Luton Town Football Club have not been given a formal reason for the authority’s Executive Committee refusals to grant a lease for land on Cutenhoe Road on Monday night, despite planning permission being given in October.
The proposed training facility would allow the club youth players to compete in the Premier League’s Under-23 development games programme.
And that would also signal a sustainable way for the football club to survive and compete with their wealthier Championship rivals – though that prospect is now in serious jeopardy.
In his match programme notes ahead of last night’s 2-0 Championship defeat to QPR, the chief executive wrote: ‘As I write this morning, I remain dumfounded at the short-sightedness of this decision and deeply concerned about the impact this will have on the club.
‘We are hoping there’s a way we can change councillors’ view on this, but we haven’t yet been given an explanation for their reasons to reject.
‘There has been some indication that it is because the land has been assigned for future educational use. If this is true, it doesn’t make sense either given that all local schools support our lease and our lease proposal contained clauses to allow the council to take the land back at any time should they want to build a school.
‘In any case, if a school was ever built on the location with space for three, why wouldn’t it want to partner with a Championship football club to deliver PE and sport?
‘Indeed, who knows, maybe we have even been tempted to build our own school in future? Indeed, our Academy is our school.
‘It feels unfathomably peculiar that our planning application for the dome itself was given consent with councillor approval, but the lease has been rejected despite officers supporting it, so we’re hopeful that there is a way forward in some form.
‘As you will know, a very small proportion of this land was earmarked for an air-dome to elevate our academy status from EPPP Category 3 to Category 2, so if there is no resolution, this will now not happen.
‘The knock-on impact of this means we’ll have some serious rethinking to do if we want our academy to provide a supply of talent to our first team squad and elsewhere.
‘Academy football is changing such that fewer youth development clubs will exist in future (as is beginning to happen now) and facilities cannot be compromised any more. Either we’re in or we’re out.
‘Along with wonderful support our fan base community has given us over the last year, without the transfer income of our former youth talent, today, I couldn’t honestly tell you if Luton Town would be in existence under current restrictions.
‘The viability and sustainability of a football club is very much more difficult to achieve without a strong academy.
‘This morning, I have been contacted by many dozens of supporters expressing their anguish at this decision, asking what can be done. My advice has been to ensure that you politely and appropriately make your feelings known to those who represent you.’
The decision not to grant a lease has also led campaign group #saveourtown – who successfully campaigned for the planning approval of Luton’s new 17,500-seat stadium at Power Court – to write an open letter to town councillors, claiming the decision was ‘not in the best interest of the people of Luton or Luton schools.’
The group’s letter read: ‘We are extremely disappointed at the Executive Committee decision to refuse a lease option to 2020 Developments Limited for land behind Cutenhoe Road.
‘Your reasons for the refusal, a) to keep the land for educational purposes b) consistency in decision making raises other important points that need to be answered.
- Living in these straightened times with the council planning an emergency budgets to raise funds, the approval and agreement of these lease terms would bring much needed cash flow to the council. To not accept this revenue stream the council is acting negligently, irresponsibly and is putting poor reasoning before the needs of the people of Luton.
- The benefits of the dome far outweigh the reasons for refusal of the lease. 2020 Developments Ltd in their planning responses have promised use of the land for schools on a daily basis. Surrounding schools are extremely happy with this arrangement and it fits in with the government agenda of physical fitness and mental wellbeing being a priority. 2020 have also offered a 12-month lease break which means the council doesn’t have to commit the land long term! This firm commitment goes much further than the Council’s general and vague comment to ‘keep the land for educational purposes.
- The ‘consistency having to be maintained’ reason towards a previous applicant wanting to lease the land is questionable. As we know, times change and the council needs to move with the times, in this extraordinarily difficult financial period a precedent can be made to counter the argument.
‘The job of a Councillor is to represent the people of Luton and do what is best for them. The Save our Town Committee believe this decision is not in the best interest of the people of Luton or Luton schools.
‘There is a bright future ahead for Luton helped not only by the football club but other major developers. We urge Luton Councillors to shake off their selective myopia and work with 2020 Developments Ltd to sort this impasse and do what is best for our town and its residents.’
The man’s an arrogant arse.