Falmer was the wrong choice.

[perseus]

Got any better ideas?

With all this hassle it appears pretty obvious that the club made the wrong decision with Falmer.

And no, I'm not playing into the hands of Lewes DC.

But let's face the facts, would any other location have created this much trouble and this long a delay which is now affecting the very future of the club?

Me, I'd rather just have a stadium. I don't care a damn where it is located.
Sheepcote Valley ... fine. So what if the public transportation is poor. Build it and they will come!
Shoreham Harbour ... fine. Yes, I know the road links are poor, but at least there's a railway.
Toads Hole and Waterhall ... both just fine in my opinion, but I know there'd be planning problems (road access in the case of the former and "wrong side of the bypass" in the case of the latter.

Look, just get us a stadium, OK?
I don't care where it is.
I don't care what it looks like.
Just 20,000 - 25,000 seats (actually I'd personally like some terracing!) and ideally the possibility for expansion (for when we're in the Premiership) ... oh, and a football pitch!

 

[British Bulldog]

It would actually have been easy enough to run buses up from Shoreham station, or from any other station along the coast line with easy access to the A27.

How about running a fleet of rowing boats up & down the river Adur to get the fans too & from the ground?

It would please the Greens if nothing else!

 

[Man of Harveys]

Splendid...we'd all be going to the match from DKM's and back there for a party afterwards.

:dance: :dance: EVERY match

 

[The Large One]

Re: Re: Falmer was the wrong choice.

Got any better ideas?

Shut up.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

So do not call me disloyal.

I

that was not aimed at you Mr Goldstone Sir

 

[ditchy]

[I was interested in the mention of Hassocks by someone on this thread. There's a large expanse of scrubby ground to the south of the town around Hassocks F.C. ground. There's a rail station and decent road connections. Well [/B][/QUOTE]


IS that close enough to the 8miles of the Pavillion etc .. would it be viable !

 

[goldstone]

Re: Re: Falmer was the wrong choice.

Got any better ideas?

Well now, I believe there was that location near Shoreham airport .......

 

[perseus]

Re: Re: Re: Falmer was the wrong choice.

Well now, I believe there was that location near Shoreham airport .......

Water under the bridge


Martin Perry did reply on this suggestion made over five years ago. He considered that Falmer was a better bet. He did not actually rule it out as the location, but decided that Falmer was better.

I did not think it was, but that was his decision.

This means that it would be inevitable that the Albion would pursue the Falmer choice.

It still remains a possibility should Falmer come a cropper. I doubt if it would be any more expensive.

The south downs lobby would not have the grounds to make a fuss because it is not AONB land. This means that a Planning Permission could go through without a Public Inquiry.

The Albion are on holiday right now.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

Oh Christ.....Its Percy Pende again

 

[Rangdo]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Falmer was the wrong choice.

I did not think it was, but that was his decision.

It was also the 3rd inspector's decision

 

[perseus]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Falmer was the wrong choice.

It was also the 3rd inspector's decision

That was from the evidence presented at the Public Inquiry about the the sequential method of choice. It was not up to the Albion at the PI to present the merits or each site. It was just up to them to show that they went to the trouble of considering each site. Just had to show the merits on planning grounds.

I refrained, deliberately, from presenting evidence about Pende at the PI, because it was all about Falmer and that to do so, it would prejudice the case against Falmer, which serves no useful purpose and plays into the hands of the opponents who have shown that they are not in the least bit interested in resolving the problem, but just being a nuisance.

How do I know that they were not interesting in resolving the problem and considering other sites. Cause I bloody well asked them!

They said they would oppose any development that occurred in an AONB, which means they would oppose Toad's Hole, Waterhall, Falmer.

That's why they were able to choose Sheepcote Valley, which is a public open space of environmental importance, but not technically an AONB. Thye tend to follow the strict letter of the legislation, no matter that public open spaces should also be protected. Falmer is not a public open space. Therefore, the public do not lose an amenity.

This is their general policy. It is not very successful. Over 60% of their objections against AONBs are actually overruled. This means they are inflexible and dogmatic and unreasonable. They cannot be dealt with on reasonable grounds on anything, not just football stadia.

 

[Rangdo]

And you think that you posess evidence on that site that LDC and their hundreds of thousands of pounds couldn't obtain to aid their opposition?
Besides which I seem to recall that the transport authority said that there was no chance of alterations to the A27 there.
Are you telling me that you have evidence to contradict the people who actually authorise road building and alteration or the findings of highly paid transport consultants?

 

[goldstone]

Well, if Falmer does get turned down we can always consider Pende. It does appear to be a serious contender. (And we could become Brighton, Hove and Shoreham Albion!)

No doubt someone will remind us why it would be a non-starter.

Then there's Hassocks ... as mentioned earlier ...

As I mentioned earlier .... just get us an effing stadium ... I don't care if it's pretty or even where it's located ...

 

[Rangdo]

Well, if Falmer does get turned down we can always consider Pende. It does appear to be a serious contender. (And we could become Brighton, Hove and Shoreham Albion!)

And you don't think there would be equal or even greater opposition at Pende?
It may not be AONB land but there are significantly more locals to stick there oar in and grind the application to a halt.
I can’t remember the exact reasons but it was deemed as inferior to Falmer on a number of points at the inquiry. It is therefore reasonably safe to assume there would be more hurdles and just as many delays.

 

[zefarelly]

How does one classify an area of outstanding natural beaty ?

now please correct me if I'm wrong, but none of the proposed site are particularly attractive and certainly not what I'd classify an AONB.

North of the A27 at Moulsecoomb/Falmer starts getting nice, but theres f*** all south bar a few fields.



mind you, if your born and bred whitehawk the inside of a skip full of shit would look nice so I guess its relative and I'm used to seeing nice places ?

 

[The Large One]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Falmer was the wrong choice.

That was from the evidence presented at the Public Inquiry about the the sequential method of choice. It was not up to the Albion at the PI to present the merits or each site. It was just up to them to show that they went to the trouble of considering each site. Just had to show the merits on planning grounds.

I refrained, deliberately, from presenting evidence about Pende at the PI, because it was all about Falmer and that to do so, it would prejudice the case against Falmer, which serves no useful purpose and plays into the hands of the opponents who have shown that they are not in the least bit interested in resolving the problem, but just being a nuisance.

How do I know that they were not interesting in resolving the problem and considering other sites. Cause I bloody well asked them!

They said they would oppose any development that occurred in an AONB, which means they would oppose Toad's Hole, Waterhall, Falmer.

That's why they were able to choose Sheepcote Valley, which is a public open space of environmental importance, but not technically an AONB. Thye tend to follow the strict letter of the legislation, no matter that public open spaces should also be protected. Falmer is not a public open space. Therefore, the public do not lose an amenity.

This is their general policy. It is not very successful. Over 60% of their objections against AONBs are actually overruled. This means they are inflexible and dogmatic and unreasonable. They cannot be dealt with on reasonable grounds on anything, not just football stadia.

Shut up, you idiot.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Falmer was the wrong choice.

Shut up, you idiot.

Tell it how it is Al.

i may question stuff, but I am not a JUDAS

 

[perseus]

And you think that you posess evidence on that site that LDC and their hundreds of thousands of pounds couldn't obtain to aid their opposition?
Besides which I seem to recall that the transport authority said that there was no chance of alterations to the A27 there.
Are you telling me that you have evidence to contradict the people who actually authorise road building and alteration or the findings of highly paid transport consultants?

In England, if you want to oppose or support something you have to get the big players on your side. e.g County Councils, appointed regional groups like the South Downs Conservation Board, need to be appeased first. Local people do not really get a look in unless they can persuade the big players that it is their interest to oppose or support it.

So the political fix for Falmer was to get the support of Brighton Council first. Alas, the south downs lobby could NOT be gotten on board. For Pende, the political fix would have to be to get West Sussex County Council on board so they would not veto the roads.

It is no good shouting from the rooftops. e.g. paper talk.

Lancing is the worst area for jobs in West Sussex. It has more deprived areas than the rest of West Sussex put together. The Councils have a duty to do something about it and even the Councillors know this. There are simply no jobs.

Their response to development at Pende is that nobody wants to develop the area for jobs. The reason why they say that nobody wants to develop it is there is no infrastructure, no roads. Roads cost dosh so it is only big plans that will work, which means big money and real intentions.

Local opposition is to building houses.

I am not bothered. The alternative is still open.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

[I was interested in the mention of Hassocks by someone on this thread. There's a large expanse of scrubby ground to the south of the town around Hassocks F.C. ground. There's a rail station and decent road connections. Well

IS that close enough to the 8miles of the Pavillion etc .. would it be viable ! [/B][/QUOTE]

It would be visible from Ditchling Beacon !

Can't see it being viable if the land isn't for sale ! It will almost definitley be privately owned by a farm, probably as set-aside land, or deliberately left as a nature reserve.

It isn't a ' scrubby ground ', it's a meadow that has been left fallow.

There will be plenty of Nimbies in Hassocks, Hurstpierpoint and Ditchling.

You probably won't get planning permission either. It might well be included INSIDE the proposed SDNP boundaries.

 

[The Large One]

In England, if you want to oppose or support something you have to get the big players on your side. e.g County Councils, appointed regional groups like the South Downs Conservation Board, need to be appeased first. Local people do not really get a look in unless they can persuade the big players that it is their interest to oppose or support it.

So the political fix for Falmer was to get the support of Brighton Council first. Alas, the south downs lobby could be gotten on board. For Pende, the political fix would have to be to get West Sussex County Council on board so they would not veto the roads.

It is no good shouting from the rooftops. e.g. paper talk.

Lancing is the worst area for jobs in West Sussex. It has more deprived areas than the rest of West Sussex put together. The Councils have a duty to do something about it and even the Councillors know this. There are simply no jobs.

Their response to development at Pende is that nobody wants to develop the area for jobs. The reason why they say that nobody wants to develop it is there is no infrastructure, no roads. Roads cost dosh so it is only big plans that will work, which means big money and real intentions.

Local opposition is to building houses.

I am not bothered. The alternative is still open.

It's like dealing with a f***ing child, it really is.

1. Adur District Council, the planning authority for the mythical island of Pende, don't want a sodding stadium built on that marshland. In fact, they don't want anything built at Pende (or land to the west of Shoreham Airport, to give it its correct name). So that's that plan knackered before you start. The plan wouldn't even get as far as West Sussex County Council being given the chance to oppose it.

2. The club don't want to go to Pende. They want to go to Falmer. The city council has said they can go to Falmer. The government has said they can go to Falmer. They don't want to go to Pende, so they're not f***ing going to Pende.

3. The alternative is not open, you bloody moron, because there is no alternative.

4. I would MUCH rather have a longer runway built for Brighton City Airport on Pende. With you under it.

5. Now will you please, shut the f*** up, you brainless idiot.