LDC's Website

[unnameable]

If you look on www.lewes.gov.uk, and click on Falmer Decision, you will see that LDC has attached three photographs of the Village Way North site. In the unlikely event that the actual site has been depicted, it must be the site looking north, rather than south. Where propaganda is concerned, Goebbels had nothing on LDC.

 

[sully]

That link doesn't work. Try this one srtraight to the pictures:

http://www.lewes.gov.uk/environment/8276.asp

It's amazing that you can actually take what look like wide angle pictures without seeing the universities. Just goes to prove how easy it is to blend buildings into the downland, really.

Actually, having just looked at where they've taken the photos from, it just proves the point even better that it's nowhere near the ridge of the downs! In fact, I'm going to go to that exact spot in the next few days and try to work out which direction the camera is really pointed in.

 

[Wardy]

right

 

[Barry Izbak]

They are a disgrace. Perhaps Brighton council should take pictures of the sea from Peacehaven to show the proposed sewage works

 

[Rangdo]

It is quite a way from the actual field as well. I'm pretty sure that if you look at the X on the map theres a big square field to the North and then two smaller squares to the North of that and the stadium is going in the second of the smaller squares right next to the A27.
That map actually does a good job of demonstrating how built up the area already is where the stadium is going.
I've walked along Village Way a number of times and it is incredible how they've managed to make the place in the photos look like it is untouched by human hands.

 

[Caveman]

That is terrible, complete and utter deception.

 

[The Large One]

If they're trying to say that the view will be spoiled, what's the point of taking a picture from there? It's a view no-one can see it from because it's on a private road which no-one uses, about a third of a mile away.

Strange bastards.

 

[Rangdo]

If they're trying to say that the view will be spoiled, what's the point of taking a picture from there? It's a view no-one can see it from because it's on a private road which no-one uses, about a third of a mile away.

Strange bastards.

Probably because the view from there is much nicer than the actual view.
It wouldn't help their cause for people to see what they are really wasting peoples money for.

 

[sully]

Perhaps they should be asked to explain why they have used the particular viewpoint if TLO is correct.

I'm off there after work with my camera to see what I can come up with......... Hope the sun comes out.

 

[sully]

Well, I've been there and the pictures are genuinely from the spot they pinpoint on the map.

HOWEVER, their image 1

Which I have taken a higher definition picture of

does NOT show the site at all. It is looking too far to the West and the site is off the frame to the right.

Their other two pictures are basically the same, but one has a bush in the way. My clearer picture of this

should show better that the site is, in fact, just the little light field in the very centre, the greenery in front of it being the location of Village Way.

Shame the sun wasn't shining, but I think this again proves that they are trying to misrepresent the site, as they show a huge expanse of field which most people will assume is where the stadium will go.

Out of interest, I went to the top of the hill behind where the photos were taken from - and you can't see into the valley at all!

 

[Woodchip]

The map has to be the worst image on a council site ever (well, except for De Vecchi's ugly face).

 

[sully]

I have asked LDC to explain their use of these photographs as below. I wonder if I'll get a response.......


Dear Sir,

I am concerned that the photographs you have on your website at the following location
http://www.lewes.gov.uk/environment/8276.asp
do not properly depict "the proposed site" for the community stadium near Falmer.

I visited the location indicated on the map yesterday, and was able to identify the views depicted. In particular, your first photograph does not show the actual stadium site at all, and in the other pictures, casual viewers would assume that you are referring to the open field in the foreground, rather than a samll section in the distance that is hardly visible at all.

More to the point, the particular viewpoint is not one that will be used by anyone once the stadium is built, so is pretty irrelevant in any case.

Would it not be more "honest" to show views that people might actually see whilst out on the Downs and to point out what part of the photograph is the actual site?

The mere fact that the university buildings are barely visible from the viewpoint chosen illustrates the fact that buildings in this area do not spoil the view. From the crest of the hill, where people might actually stray whilst out walking, none of the land in the valley depicted can be seen.

I would be grateful for your comments regarding the use of these pictures and your proposals for more accurately describing what they depict.

Yours faithfully,

Richard Sullivan


Edit: Bugger, I read that over several times before sending it, and as soon as it's on here, a spelling mistake jumps out at me!!

 

[Curious Orange]

Thanks Sully, that is certainly an enlightening bit of investigation that you've done.

 

[The Large One]

I have asked LDC to explain their use of these photographs as below. I wonder if I'll get a response.......


Dear Sir,

I am concerned that the photographs you have on your website at the following location
http://www.lewes.gov.uk/environment/8276.asp
do not properly depict "the proposed site" for the community stadium near Falmer.

I visited the location indicated on the map yesterday, and was able to identify the views depicted. In particular, your first photograph does not show the actual stadium site at all, and in the other pictures, casual viewers would assume that you are referring to the open field in the foreground, rather than a samll section in the distance that is hardly visible at all.

More to the point, the particular viewpoint is not one that will be used by anyone once the stadium is built, so is pretty irrelevant in any case.

Would it not be more "honest" to show views that people might actually see whilst out on the Downs and to point out what part of the photograph is the actual site?

The mere fact that the university buildings are barely visible from the viewpoint chosen illustrates the fact that buildings in this area do not spoil the view. From the crest of the hill, where people might actually stray whilst out walking, none of the land in the valley depicted can be seen.

I would be grateful for your comments regarding the use of these pictures and your proposals for more accurately describing what they depict.

Yours faithfully,

Richard Sullivan


Edit: Bugger, I read that over several times before sending it, and as soon as it's on here, a spelling mistake jumps out at me!!

Send both sets of images to the Argus as well with that letter. I feel another photographic exposé coming on...

 

[sully]

Send both sets of images to the Argus as well with that letter. I feel another photographic exposé coming on...

I have copied the email to them already.

I didn't make it clear that I have my own photographs, so might follow it up with a link to the photobucket location for them that I used to display them above.

 

[Woodchip]

I sent an e-mail to LDC and copied the argus in yesterday as well. Oh, I also copied the Labour Party in as well, just for a bit of fun.

 

[sully]

Any chance of sharing your email, Woodchip? It would be interesting to compare notes!

 

[Rangdo]

Good work Sully. Unfortunately we know exactly what the reply to the letter will be. The same bullshit and wriggling out of it that they did when confronted about the photos they doctored.

 

[The Large One]

As it happens, I also went to Falmer yesterday and took some piccies of the site. Hang on a bit, and I'll see if I can put them up on here. Won't be a mo...

 

[sully]

Good work Sully. Unfortunately we know exactly what the reply to the letter will be. The same bullshit and wriggling out of it that they did when confronted about the photos they doctored.

Ah, but this time they're clearly labelled as "A selection of photos of the proposed site", which one of them clearly isn't and the other two also cover half the South Downs.

They are not as described however you look at it.