City Council back Falmer

[Lord Bracknell]

There is a REALLY BIG BLUNDER in the LDC evidence:-

22. The results of this analysis indicate that these junctions would operate at or around saturation level during the busiest hour prior to a Weekend afternoon kick-off.

23. Notwithstanding this, for short periods of time during the busiest hour, demand is expected to exceed the capacity of the junctions. However, this situation would occur for only short periods and the junctions would return to operating within capacity after these short demand spikes had ended. This is a typical pattern for a sports stadium and it is unusual for new highway capacity to be provided to accommodate such spikes in traffic demand, which may occur on less than 50 occasions during the year. Event day management plans would be put in place to manage periods of peak highway demand and minimise the effects of these spikes. These may include temporarily closing roads for through traffic.

Paras 22 & 23 do not appear to quite tie in with the main report at 8.4.3. There you suggest no problems at all except for the one junction and that can be mitigated. Can you make these paras more positive?





A retired transport planner writes ...

It is customary when commissioning work from transport consultants for some discussion between the client and the consultant to take place before a document is finalised by the consultant.

It is EXTREMELY UNUSUAL, however, for the client's comments (e.g "this is embarrassing; can't you spin the story some other way?") actually to be published in the final version.

But it's quite revealing when it happens.

 

[Tooting Gull]

.....and this is what Lewes DC have submitted
(Full details http://www.lewes.gov.uk/environment/10570.asp)


5.11 There is no national or regional need for the development in the planning application, i.e. a football stadium.

I think that's the one that makes you want to nuke the lot of them. Utter, utter c***s. How long has the club been around? How inadequate is Withdean? Haven't we, for our part, tried very hard to accomodate other, non-football fans both in the Falmer proposals and at Withdean? Look at it too long, and it'll drive you nuts...

 

[John Boy]

A retired transport planner writes ...

It is customary when commissioning work from transport consultants for some discussion between the client and the consultant to take place before a document is finalised by the consultant.

It is EXTREMELY UNUSUAL, however, for the client's comments (e.g "this is embarrassing; can't you spin the story some other way?") actually to be published in the final version.

But it's quite revealing when it happens.

Is that the actual report LDC have sent to Ruth Kelly?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Yeah, but does what the City Council back make a difference to Ruth Kellys position?

Planning law REQUIRES The Secretary of State to give considerable weight to the policies and views of the local planning authority for the area in which a proposed development is located. Brighton & Hove City Council are the local planning authority. Lewes District Council are not.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Here's some more evidence of LDC spin in the full Report:-

8.4.3 [Before this para, are you able to compare what look like small increases in queueing times, bar one junction, with other sports stadia in other cities. Presumably if you are going to locate stadia in cities, and thus in the most sustainable locations, there is going to be some inconvenience and this happens elsewhere. We are talking about a problem with one junction only] The results of the junction analysis demonstrate that additional traffic associated with the development proposals would not materially worsen the existing operational performance of the Wilson Avenue/Roedean Road/Marina Way, Warren Road.B2123 Falmer Road and B2123 High Street/A259 Marine Drive junctions. Regarding the Wilson Avenue/Warren Road signalised junction some mitigation measures will have to be introduced in order for it to operate within capacity.

8.4.4 It is therefore apparent that the development proposals could come forward without placing an additional, material impact on the operation of the highway network.

8.5 Summary and potential mitigation

[PROVIDE EXAMPLES OF THE TYPE OF MITIGATION MEASURES THAT CAN BE PUT IN PLACE AT WILSON AVENUE/WARREN ROAD]
IN YOUR SUMMARY MAKE SURE THAT YOU SAY THAT THIS IS VERY GOOD COMPARED TO MOST STADIA IN URBAN AREAS AND THAT THERE WILL BE NO PROBLEMS

 

[Gilliver's Travels]

There is a REALLY BIG BLUNDER in the LDC evidence:-

Paras 22 & 23 do not appear to quite tie in with the main report at 8.4.3. There you suggest no problems at all except for the one junction and that can be mitigated. Can you make these paras more positive?

Sack the typist!! Lucky she at least remembered to delete the bit that said: "Miss Figgins, make sure you delete that comment. Last thing we want is Bassford plastering it all over NSC and people thinking we're just a bunch of lying crooks..."

 

[The Oldman]

You have to laugh. The transport consultant for Lewes suggests supporters will walk to Sheepcote Valley from Rottingdean, Saltdean and Peacehaven.

 

[Gilliver's Travels]

There is a REALLY BIG BLUNDER in the LDC evidence:-

Well, LB, does this mean that LDC's evidence is now officially, er, "Fatally flawed" ? I think the Argus should be told.

 

[The Clown of Pevensey Bay]

Here's some more evidence of LDC spin in the full Report:-

8.4.3 [Before this para, are you able to compare what look like small increases in queueing times, bar one junction, with other sports stadia in other cities. Presumably if you are going to locate stadia in cities, and thus in the most sustainable locations, there is going to be some inconvenience and this happens elsewhere. We are talking about a problem with one junction only] The results of the junction analysis demonstrate that additional traffic associated with the development proposals would not materially worsen the existing operational performance of the Wilson Avenue/Roedean Road/Marina Way, Warren Road.B2123 Falmer Road and B2123 High Street/A259 Marine Drive junctions. Regarding the Wilson Avenue/Warren Road signalised junction some mitigation measures will have to be introduced in order for it to operate within capacity.

8.4.4 It is therefore apparent that the development proposals could come forward without placing an additional, material impact on the operation of the highway network.

8.5 Summary and potential mitigation

[PROVIDE EXAMPLES OF THE TYPE OF MITIGATION MEASURES THAT CAN BE PUT IN PLACE AT WILSON AVENUE/WARREN ROAD]
IN YOUR SUMMARY MAKE SURE THAT YOU SAY THAT THIS IS VERY GOOD COMPARED TO MOST STADIA IN URBAN AREAS AND THAT THERE WILL BE NO PROBLEMS

Bloody hell, this is priceless. Lewes District Council clearly haven't finished compiling their evidence before submitting it. (Remember, they were the ones who wanted extra time to compile their evidence from the government.) Perhaps the Argus ought to be, er, told!

 

[Caveman]

You have to laugh. The transport consultant for Lewes suggests supporters will walk to Sheepcote Valley from Rottingdean, Saltdean and Peacehaven.

Well I'd personally use my space hopper as it would be a lot quicker....

 

[Caveman]

Here's some more evidence of LDC spin in the full Report:-

8.4.3 [Before this para, are you able to compare what look like small increases in queueing times, bar one junction, with other sports stadia in other cities. Presumably if you are going to locate stadia in cities, and thus in the most sustainable locations, there is going to be some inconvenience and this happens elsewhere. We are talking about a problem with one junction only] The results of the junction analysis demonstrate that additional traffic associated with the development proposals would not materially worsen the existing operational performance of the Wilson Avenue/Roedean Road/Marina Way, Warren Road.B2123 Falmer Road and B2123 High Street/A259 Marine Drive junctions. Regarding the Wilson Avenue/Warren Road signalised junction some mitigation measures will have to be introduced in order for it to operate within capacity.

8.4.4 It is therefore apparent that the development proposals could come forward without placing an additional, material impact on the operation of the highway network.

8.5 Summary and potential mitigation

[PROVIDE EXAMPLES OF THE TYPE OF MITIGATION MEASURES THAT CAN BE PUT IN PLACE AT WILSON AVENUE/WARREN ROAD]
IN YOUR SUMMARY MAKE SURE THAT YOU SAY THAT THIS IS VERY GOOD COMPARED TO MOST STADIA IN URBAN AREAS AND THAT THERE WILL BE NO PROBLEMS

Oh dear, back to school on Monday springs to mind. Very worrying

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I intend reading LDC's consultants' reports in more detail over the next day or two.

A quick skim through them, however, has failed to find ANY workable proposals that would effectively prevent (or even discourage) match-day car traffic from turning up in the vicinity of the stadium and looking for an on-street parking space.

Whitehawk will presumably be swamped with cars.

And it's not good enough to say that people will be able to use public transport, just because it's there. People will use public transport because the alternatives are either very inconvenient, very expensive, or simply not available. If their case for Sheepcote Valley is going to succeed, LDC will have to persuade the Secretary of State that they have a realistic scheme to discourage people from driving there. I can't see it in the consultant's report.

 

[mdotw]

I realise we all know what is buried under Sheepcote Valley, I was talking to my dad at the weekend in the late 30's just before the war he and his freinds used to go there taking off the badges on the old army uniforms that were buried there. He said when you used to stand on the racehill the drop you see in to Bevendean was the same in to Sheepcote Valley now its all levelled with rubbish surely there is no way any foundations could be put in there? He also mentioned the drop was at such an angle you could not walk down it you would roll down.

I said he should write to the argus about his memories of then and see what kind of feedback this would get from others?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I realise we all know what is buried under Sheepcote Valley, I was talking to my dad at the weekend in the late 30's just before the war he and his freinds used to go there taking off the badges on the old army uniforms that were buried there. He said when you used to stand on the racehill the drop you see in to Bevendean was the same in to Sheepcote Valley now its all levelled with rubbish surely there is no way any foundations could be put in there? He also mentioned the drop was at such an angle you could not walk down it you would roll down.

I said he should write to the argus about his memories of then and see what kind of feedback this would get from others?

A good point, but ...

... I think it IS possible to locate a stadium at the sea-end of Sheepcote Valley without touching the former landfill site - roughly where Whitehawk Football Club are currently sited.

 

[Superseagull]

And they seem to think that away supporters will be happy to get the National Express to Poole Valley and then walk to Sheepcote!

Also it is interesting to note that according to there table of train destinations from Brighton no trains seem to go to Lewes (past Falmer).

And they seem to think there are 55 buses an hour to Sheepcote I'm not so sure.

Also, the new Brighton rapid transport system (that is not yet designed, funded or built) can have the seats taken out on match day so we can all be whizzed round Brighton like cattle on the way to market.

And what the F**K is the King Alfred Docks development?

 

[Biscuit]

Bassford, you deserve a medal for finding that, you really do! Get it in the local rag and watch LDC, DeVechhi and Baker squirm in embarassment.

 

[mona]

I think that's the one that makes you want to nuke the lot of them. Utter, utter c***s. How long has the club been around? How inadequate is Withdean? Haven't we, for our part, tried very hard to accomodate other, non-football fans both in the Falmer proposals and at Withdean? Look at it too long, and it'll drive you nuts...

5.11 proves what ANTI-SPORT COLONIALISTS Lewes DC are.

 

[The Clown of Pevensey Bay]

A good point, but ...

... I think it IS possible to locate a stadium at the sea-end of Sheepcote Valley without touching the former landfill site - roughly where Whitehawk Football Club are currently sited.

This was raised as evidence by Lewes in the last PI, the morning of the day that Easy 10's friend Mrs Hawkins got stuck in.

 

[ac gull]

There are two errors in the second of their three reports - LB has picked up the first one of these re his first post ( Ive posted the second error at end of this post below )

LB's second post is their error in their third report.

Think we may have a Seagulls fan maintaining their website who has uploaded the "almost final" documents; but not the "final" ones they sent in! - you couldn't make it up!!!

Their main spin is that east Brighton is now becoming the "leisure quarter" of the city re existing / proposed facilities in re Brighton Arena and Brighton Marina - thus any stadium should be in the same place as all other leisure facilities

I think we should thank them for giving this such prominence and bringing it to the govts attention - basically they are saying that transport routes in that part of the city will already be under more pressure from increased volumes - so put a stadium there as well

The reality being that having a stadium there ( e.g a midweek evening game the same night as a concert at Brighton Arena ) will make the traffic problems there even worse - precisely why Brighton City Council want / support a stadium at Falmer

Their other point being all new stadiums have transport problems / bottlenecks re access - and Sheepcote would be "quite good" in comparison to others - well that's what the bloke was told to change his report to!!!

Other error is:

Conclusion
34. In summary the provision of a new Community Stadium within the Sheepcote Valley would provide the opportunity to locate a new community facility within an established urban area which is well connected to existing centres of activity by a wide range of modes including walking, cycling, bus and Rapid Transit. Through focussed travel planning and careful event management, accessibility would be maximised enabling all visitors to access the Stadium by non-car means of travel.

Again, as per main report, can you say it would be in a sustainable location in accordance with govt policy etc.

Oh, and they have written their report / submission on the basis that they are assuming Falmer would open in summer 2008 - being as it would take 18 months to build it's summer 2009 at the earliest

After looking through all their documents; you would have to be quietly confident that they haven't got a case re Sheepcote Valley being a better location - have they tried driving into Brighton on a Saturday lunchtime !?!

 

[The Clown of Pevensey Bay]

.....and this is what Lewes DC have submitted
(Full details http://www.lewes.gov.uk/environment/10570.asp)


5.17 There have been major new changes in circumstance since the First Secretary of State’s decision, particularly the identification by Brighton and Hove City Council and others of the coastal belt of the City as a hub for major, international level, developments and proposals for a Rapid Transit system to facilitate access between Brighton Station and the various sites involved.(Matter (d)).

5.18 The Sheepcote Valley site is in very close proximity to the eastern end of the hub, and thus would benefit from the ability of football fans to undertake multi-purpose visits to Brighton, thereby spreading the load in terms of transport accessibility.

So let me get this straight. Lewes council want us to get to games either by monorail, or an upgraded Volks Railway?


MRS DEVECCHI! IS THIS A PIECE OF YOUR BRAIN?