THE CAMROSE stadium is “like an old friend” that would be dearly “missed”, the planning appeal into the future of the Camrose has heard.

Since Tuesday a government inspector has heard evidence to determine what will happen to the beloved stadium and a decision on the future of the Camrose is drawing ever closer as the appeal hearing continued for a fourth and final day.

Rafi Razzak, the former owner and chairman of the Basingstoke Town Football Club, is appealing against the borough council’s decision to reject two different proposals to demolish the Camrose and build 85 dwellings and a 70-bedroom care home and six new dwellings. The Camrose was the home of the club for more than 70 years until it was evicted by Mr Razzak in 2016. The club currently plays at the Winklebury Football Complex.

SEE ALSO: 'Hear it from the street': Steve Frangou makes emotional appeal in his Camrose hearing statement

As previously reported the hearing heard how the Camrose and Winklebury football grounds cannot be compared in regard to the facilities, the capacity for fans and the accessibility.

William Webster, counsel for the rule six-party, who have been campaigning to save the grounds presented his closing statement.

He said: “After his planning applications were rejected either Mr Razzak wished to take his anger out or he was motivated to make sure club football could not return to the town. The Camrose is like an old friend and people would miss it.”

He said, "a like for like comparison" is not possible and Winklebury was “no more than a lifeboat" to keep football going in Basingstoke.

He also pointed out that the Winklebury complex can't be upgraded to support the club going up the league.

Ruchi Parekh, counsel for the council also concluded that the two grounds cannot be compared.

She added: “The council case is that it is not better, and it is not possible to compare the two, the Winklebury site is not a proper football stadium.

“It is common ground that this appeal will result in the permanent loss of the grounds, which is the home and heart of the football club.”

She pointed out other factors including that onsite parking is “greater at Camrose” with “easy access to coach parking” unlike that at Winklebury.

READ MORE: 'He has no leg to stand on': Protesters hopeful as Camrose stadium appeal hearing to be held next month

Meanwhile, Simon Bird, counsel for the appellant (Barson Developments Ltd), defended plans.

He said: "There is no policy requirement that the new policy should replicate the existing grounds.

"Unsurprisingly the loss of the Camrose has provoked a reaction from many and there will always be this from people who have grown up with the facilities and who visited them when they were younger."

He went on to say these personal attachments "cloud judgments" and works to make it a playable ground would run into "eye-watering sums" making it a "pipe dream".

Government inspector Dominic Young will be visiting both the Camrose and Winklebury sites on Monday (March 28) before he starts his decision-making process.

Full coverage of appeal hearing:

Day one of appeal hearing as debate starts

Recap: Second day of Camrose planning appeal hearing as cross-examination continues

Recap: Fate of Camrose debate continues on day three of the appeal hearing process

Message from the editor

Thank you for reading this story. We really appreciate your support.

Please help us to continue bringing you all the trusted news from your area by sharing this story or by following our Facebook page.