Stadium conversion and community facilities at Abbey Stadium, Lady Lane, Swindon

What was proposed

The application sought to convert the stadium building, add commercial and community buildings, and provide outdoor sports facilities, open space and infrastructure.

“Proposal: Change of use of Sui Generis Stadium Building to Commercial (Class E) and Community Use (Class F2), the erection of a new Community Storage Building (Class B8) and a new Commercial Building (Class E), including outdoor sports facilities, public open space and associated infrastructure…”

“The Proposal This is a full planning application seeking a change of use of Sui Generis Stadium Building to Commercial (Class E) and Community Use (Class F2), the erection of a new Community Storage Building (Class B8) and a new Commercial Building (Class E), including outdoor sports facilities, public open space and associated infrastructure plus associated works.”

Officer report

The site

The northern one-hectare parcel is beside Lady Lane, surrounded by housing on three sides and next to a proposed 130-home development.

“The Site and Surroundings The site is situated within Blunsdon St Andrew, approximately 5 km north of Swindon Town Centre. The site is bounded to the north by Lady Lane (B4534), which proceeds adjacent to the A419 (Blunsdon Bypass), turning westward, where the site access is taken.”

“This application relates to the northern parcel of the overall Abbey Stadium site and measures approximately 1ha. The site is surrounded by residential developments on three sides and is immediately north of the sister application, S/25/1177, for 130 residential units and associated outdoor space.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions

Earlier permissions covered stadium redevelopment, business floorspace, housing, a care home, a fire station and associated facilities.

“S/07/1365 – Outline application for the demolition of existing stadium and construction of new stadium, with youth training facilities, 16,745m2 of business (B1) floorspace, a care home and 450 residential dwellings - Access not reserved. APPROVAL GRANTED (August 2011)”

“S/12/1826 – Demolition of existing stadium and construction of the new stadium, with youth training facilities, 16,745m2. of business (B1) floorspace, a care home and 450 no. residential dwellings - Access not reserved (Variation of conditions 3, 8&9, 12-15, 18, 25-27, 29&30, 32-34, 38, 43, 45&46 and 48 from previous outline permission S/07/1365) APPROVAL GRANTED (August 2013)”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the proposal’s benefits were outweighed by the loss of speedway before a viable nearby alternative was available.

“It has been determined that the application would replace one type of community use with several other community facilities both sporting and non-sporting. The proposal therefore complies with policy CM4 of the SBLP as well as many other policies within the Local Plan. These must be given positive weight within the planning balance.”

“Reason for Refusal: The Proposal would irrevocably remove the only speedway track from the local area where there is still a clear demand with no viable alternative within or near to Swindon to the detriment of the public/community, as per the Playing Pitch & Outdoor Sports Strategy 2026 and relevant policies within the National Planning Policy Framework.”

Officer report

The speedway issue

The proposal met the community-facilities policy, but conflicted with the strategy to protect the speedway facility until an alternative venue was available.

“Maintaining and Enhancing Community Facilities and the Need to Preserve Speedway Venues SBLP Policy CM4 specifically relates to community facilities and includes criteria which can lead to a facility being lost via certain exception criteria. Policy CM4: Maintaining and Enhancing Community Facilities a.”

“However, in addition to policy CM4 Swindon Borough Council also has a revised Playing Pitch and Outdoor Sports Strategy 2025 which specifically considers Speedway. The strategy acknowledges that Speedway and the demand for stadia is in national decline, however, it also confirms that for every facility that closes the need to preserve the remaining increases.”

Officer report

Public views

Most public comments opposed the application, citing the loss of speedway, traffic, infrastructure and trust concerns, while some supported community and economic benefits.

“Public Comments The overwhelming majority of comments received on this application are duplicates of the related residential application, S/25/1177, as the two cases are inextricably linked both in terms of delivery and the public consciousness.”

“Heritage & Cultural Value: • Stadium seen as a 75‑year cultural landmark and part of Swindon’s identity. • Loss described as ‘sacrilege’ by some objectors. • Coventry Stadium Appeal (2024) used as precedent to resist loss of motorsport venues. Traffic, Transport & Infrastructure: • Significant congestion concerns relating to Lady Lane, A419 and Cold Harbour junction. • Safety issues raised regarding high‑speed slip roads.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The speakers included three ward councillors, the agent, a supporter, five objectors and a parish councillor.

What members heard

Supporters cited the proposed facilities and Studley Grange, while objectors argued for leisure use, a return of speedway and better protection of the stadium.

“Officers have accepted that the amenity facilities proposed meet the test set out in Policy CM4 of the Local Plan. • The proposed amenity facilities would serve 55,000 people per year, including people that would not be served by the continued existence of Abbey Stadium.”

“Local residents want the entire Abbey Stadium site to be utilised for leisure and the amenity of residents. • Credible operators for the speedway provision at Abbey Stadium have come forwards and presented a case as to how they can bring the sport back to the venue. • Abbey Stadium has hosted international competitions and the proposed amenity facilities are not of a sufficient scale or quality to compensate for the loss of the stadium.”

Minutes

The vote

Councillor Neil Hopkins proposed refusal, Councillor Claire Crilly seconded it, and every councillor supported the proposal.

“Councillor Neil Hopkins proposed that planning permission be refused, in line with and on the basis of the recommendations set out in the Case Officer’s report. Councillor Claire Crilly seconded the proposal. All Councillors were in favour of the proposal, and none were opposed.”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was refused in line with the officer recommendation.

“Resolved – That planning permission be refused, in line with and on the basis of the recommendations set out in the Case Officer’s report.”

Minutes