Stratford Sphere Venue Plans Officially Withdrawn By Us Firm

naomi24 | 09:00 Wed 10th Jan 2024 | News

59 Answers

//The US company behind a proposed Las Vegas-style "Sphere" venue in east London has withdrawn its plans.

Madison Square Garden Entertainment (MSG) said it could not participate in a process that was "merely a political football between rival parties". In December, Housing Secretary Michael Gove used his powers to review the rejection of planning permission by London Mayor Sadiq Khan.

In a letter to the Planning Inspectorate, MSG said it was "extremely disappointing" that Londoners would "not benefit from the Sphere's groundbreaking technology and the thousands of well-paying jobs it would have created".

The letter said: "I write to confirm that we are officially withdrawing our application from the Planning Inspectorate process.

"After spending millions of pounds acquiring our site in Stratford and collaboratively engaging in a five-year planning process with numerous governmental bodies, including the local planning authority who approved our plans following careful review, we cannot continue to participate in a process that is merely a political football between rival parties."//

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-67920774

What with his extortionately prohibitive taxes on motorists and now blocking what would have been an enormous source of income for the city - not to mention jobs to help re-generate one of the poorest areas in the capital - the ever self-serving Sadiq Khan has proven himself to be London's worst enemy. Has he any chance of re-election? I sincerely hope not.

Pope Calls For Universal Ban On Surrogate Parenting

Will Fujitsu Be Held To Account Over The Po Scandal?

Answers

1 to 20 of 59

1 2 3 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

Peter Pedant

MSG have decided it wdnt make them as much mooah as they once thought (" Londoners would "not benefit from the Sphere's groundbreaking technology and the thousands of well-paying jobs")

and have dressed it up as something else

( something you never see on AB otherwise)

shd a forrin co be interfering in a country's local elections? an american one as well - never ! never !

naomi24

Question Author

Selective and misleading editing from you again, Peter Pedant. This is what the company said.

//MSG said it was "extremely disappointing" that Londoners would "not benefit from the Sphere's groundbreaking technology and the thousands of well-paying jobs it would have created".//

bednobs

thank god - the drawing looks awful! i would not be happy to have that on my doorstep - would you?

naomi24

Question Author

I think it's fab. It would have been a great attraction to tourists and would have generated a good deal of wealth - and jobs. Mr Khan is a disaster for London.

Hope your eyes have improved, bednobs.

ladybirder

No I would not. Nightmare!

Hopkirk

I agree with Bednobs (and Mr Khan)

douglas9401

Americans withdraw from plans to put massive glowing ball in morrass of crime and filth.

pastafreak

It's not "fab"...its dreadful light pollution at the very least. People actually do live there...I'd certainly not want that thing glowing near my windows, nor would I want the increased vehicular and human traffic near my home. It's one thing to choose to live near something like that, but having it forced on you?

Old_Geezer

It's the sort of thing that doesn't fit well in a traditional looking setting. It clashes.

One can understand it may look fine somewhere like Las Vegas but I'm unconvinced about London's suitability.

naomi24

Question Author

I think it's fab, pasta. It was to be built on quite a big area of ground - so not on anyone's doorstep.

//People actually do live there...//

I know - some of my family among them.

youngmafbog

I too wouldn't want that near me.

bednobs

"I think it's fab"

predicated on the fact you live in the country (i think that's what you said before)

i find it incerdibly hard to believe you wouldnt mind having that on your doorstep, and TBH am pretty glad that the local residents who objected to it were listened to

bednobs

although it's very rare, i agree with Peter. The company is being very disingenous by saying "MSG said it was "extremely disappointing" that Londoners would "not benefit from the Sphere's groundbreaking technology and the thousands of well-paying jobs it would have created"

as if big forgieng corps care or are disappointed on behalf of the locals. They care about their bottom line - that's what all commercial companies do. Rightly so, but to dress it up as second hand disappointment on behalf of little people is stupid

naomi24

Question Author

bednobs, I live in the country now - but I didn't always. I know the area very well indeed.

We should be welcoming huge investment such as this and the regeneration and jobs it would have provided, but Mr Khan has his reasons - and altruistic they ain't.

bednobs

i dont believe in alturism full stop, either on behalf of MSG or Khan. Planning law is very prescibed, and there have to be grounds, you can't just reject plans willy-nilly. The 3 reasons it's been rejected seem reasonable reasons to me

divegirl

As someone who lives on the Central line [a mere 7 stops from Stratford and go there often] I can't see how it would 'fit in'. The plans show it next to the station and there are two shopping centres in that exact area already, as well as the Queen Elizabeth [olympic] park.

Stratford is a lively vibrant town and has grown massively since the building of the olympic stadium [now home to WHU and used as a music and live events venue].

Personally, I'm pleased it has been rejected on the grounds that there is still a massive amount of building work going on in the area and the locals need time to come to terms with that let alone this monstrosity :)

New Judge

“It's the sort of thing that doesn't fit well in a traditional looking setting. It clashes.”

The location of the proposal was not in a “traditional looking setting” and there was little for it to clash with. It was to be built in the fork of two diverging railway lines, between those lines and Westfield Shopping Centre. Towards the north-west is Stratford (so-called) International railway station (opened in 2009). To the south-west is the Olympic Aquatic Centre and the London Stadium (built for the Olympics and now the home of West Ham United football club). Beyond that lies the Olympic Park. Until the 2012 Olympics, that area of East London was largely desolate. It was a large expanse of wasteland that had been utterly neglected since WW2, criss-crossed by railway lines, with a few industrial units dotted here and there. There is little there of significance much more than fifteen years old and certainly nothing notably traditional. Anybody who has moved into the various apartments that have been built there would (or should) have been aware that they were in the centre of an ongoing area of development (rather like London’s former Docklands were thirty years ago) and should not be surprised at such proposals.

There is little wonder that the developers have pulled out. They are not going to fanny about waiting for arguments between politicans to be settled when they can invest their money elsewhere. Meanwhile a valuable chunk of London's real estate lies fallow when it could be developed to bring in some much needed revenue.

Untitled

a giant projector for massive advertisements beaming out across a whole community is not my idea of making good use of the space. public consent has never been given for mass advertising and most of it is a horrid badgering nuisance. it is a very valuable piece of land and i am sure it will be snapped up by a more responsible developer who obey the rules. Khan is not just there to protect the interests of business in London but also to protect the interests of londoners... he has done that and most residents seem happy with the decision.