Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
New public enquiry
- Thread starter John Boy
- Start date
Lord Bracknell
On fire
Right. So Percy now claims that his preferred site is a place that is the centre of what would be a major political scandal - the place where Adur District Council has (apparently) colluded with a developer in a scheme that is designed to avoid landfill tax.
It's also a site where planning permission has already been given for a new use - a golf course.
This is exactly the complex legal and planning mess that he thinks will deliver a stadium site "without the need for a public inquiry".
The vast scheme that he has been pushing also includes housing development, luxury hotels, lots of additional sports facilities, new roads, a new railway station and a massive impact upon any future options for Shoreham Airport.
Whatever plans come forward for major development in or around Shoreham Airport will be complex and difficult to pull together. It will take years and years to make any progress on that site.
What does Percy think will happen to the Albion in the meantime? They'll obviously have to stay at Withdean while all this is sorted out. That's Withdean - the place where we are guaranteed to be losing money all the time we are there. That's Withdean, where we don't have planning permission to play, unless we can show that we will shortly be moving on. That's Withdean, where an application to stay for the time that it would take to develop Pende would almost certainly be refused by Brighton & Hove City Council (particularly now that the Labour Group has lost its majority).
This idiotic scheme of Percy's is nothing but the route towards the destruction of the Albion.
It's also a site where planning permission has already been given for a new use - a golf course.
This is exactly the complex legal and planning mess that he thinks will deliver a stadium site "without the need for a public inquiry".
The vast scheme that he has been pushing also includes housing development, luxury hotels, lots of additional sports facilities, new roads, a new railway station and a massive impact upon any future options for Shoreham Airport.
Whatever plans come forward for major development in or around Shoreham Airport will be complex and difficult to pull together. It will take years and years to make any progress on that site.
What does Percy think will happen to the Albion in the meantime? They'll obviously have to stay at Withdean while all this is sorted out. That's Withdean - the place where we are guaranteed to be losing money all the time we are there. That's Withdean, where we don't have planning permission to play, unless we can show that we will shortly be moving on. That's Withdean, where an application to stay for the time that it would take to develop Pende would almost certainly be refused by Brighton & Hove City Council (particularly now that the Labour Group has lost its majority).
This idiotic scheme of Percy's is nothing but the route towards the destruction of the Albion.
disgruntled h blocker
Active member
Lord Bracknell said:Right. So Percy now claims that his preferred site is a place that is the centre of what would be a major political scandal - the place where Adur District Council has (apparently) colluded with a developer in a scheme that is designed to avoid landfill tax.
It's also a site where planning permission has already been given for a new use - a golf course.
This is exactly the complex legal and planning mess that he thinks will deliver a stadium site "without the need for a public inquiry".
The vast scheme that he has been pushing also includes housing development, luxury hotels, lots of additional sports facilities, new roads, a new railway station and a massive impact upon any future options for Shoreham Airport.
Whatever plans come forward for major development in or around Shoreham Airport will be complex and difficult to pull together. It will take years and years to make any progress on that site.
What does Percy think will happen to the Albion in the meantime? They'll obviously have to stay at Withdean while all this is sorted out. That's Withdean - the place where we are guaranteed to be losing money all the time we are there. That's Withdean, where we don't have planning permission to play, unless we can show that we will shortly be moving on. That's Withdean, where an application to stay for the time that it would take to develop Pende would almost certainly be refused by Brighton & Hove City Council (particularly now that the Labour Group has lost its majority).
This idiotic scheme of Percy's is nothing but the route towards the destruction of the Albion.
So many of our fans are blinkered as to thinking that Falmer is the ONLY possible route forward and location for a new ground. Saints had that problem 10 years ago, channeling thousands of pounds into the Stoneham complex, to only find that new development options appeared.
There will always be other options, and if DK and the others haven't got a backup plan, I'd be very surprised!
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Yes yes yes Lord B.Lord Bracknell said:Right. So Percy now claims that his preferred site is a place that is the centre of what would be a major political scandal - the place where Adur District Council has (apparently) colluded with a developer in a scheme that is designed to avoid landfill tax.
It's also a site where planning permission has already been given for a new use - a golf course.
This is exactly the complex legal and planning mess that he thinks will deliver a stadium site "without the need for a public inquiry".
The vast scheme that he has been pushing also includes housing development, luxury hotels, lots of additional sports facilities, new roads, a new railway station and a massive impact upon any future options for Shoreham Airport.
Whatever plans come forward for major development in or around Shoreham Airport will be complex and difficult to pull together. It will take years and years to make any progress on that site.
What does Percy think will happen to the Albion in the meantime? They'll obviously have to stay at Withdean while all this is sorted out. That's Withdean - the place where we are guaranteed to be losing money all the time we are there. That's Withdean, where we don't have planning permission to play, unless we can show that we will shortly be moving on. That's Withdean, where an application to stay for the time that it would take to develop Pende would almost certainly be refused by Brighton & Hove City Council (particularly now that the Labour Group has lost its majority).
This idiotic scheme of Percy's is nothing but the route towards the destruction of the Albion.
But APART from that, what exactly is the problem with Pende ?
Lord Bracknell
On fire
There isn't one.John Boy said:
Lewes District Council have already told the Inspector (at the Pre-Inquiry meeting) that they will not be presenting evidence on any sites that are not on Prescott's list.
Falmer Parish Council told the Pre-Inquiry meeting that they were considering a number of additional sites. They were asked to notify the Football Club what these were by a date in early October. They didn't do so.
As an organisation that will be legally represented at the resumed Inquiry, Falmer Parish Council have agreed to provide a proof of their evidence to the other major parties by the first week in January (ie six weeks before the Inquiry opens).
Other members of the Public can submit their comments (including additional sites, if they wish) at any time up to the start of the Inquiry and - should they ask to present evidence in person - even later, when they turn up to have their say.
The Inspector has said that he doesn't want to see rabbits pulled out of hats, but he has no powers to prevent sites being mentioned at a late stage, because Prescott's terms of reference specifically refer to the possibility that an as yet unidentified suitable site might be found.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
Step back a few months.disgruntled h blocker said:
Prescott received TWO Inspectors' reports, each of them recommending that Falmer be rejected. Prescott did NOT accept those recommendations.
Therefore, we have to conclude that he considers that Falmer is available and suitable.
He has, however, re-opened the Inquiry - because he wishes to be fully satisfied that the 3-part legal test that has to be met before he grants permission for development in the AONB is, in fact, passed. That is:- (1) that the development is necessary and beneficial, in terms of national interest; (2) that the environmental impact can be mitigated; and (3) that there is no other site available.
Since he isn't asking the new Inquiry to look at (1) or (2), it must be assumed that he is satisfied that these two tests are met. The terms of reference are restricted to (3) - is there another suitable site that is available?
If the answer is YES, then Prescott must refuse planning permission for Falmer. If the answer is NO, then Falmer gets the go-ahead.
It's as simple as that.
Last edited:
Pende can be seen as an additional problem or as an opportunity.
http://www.glaucus.org.uk/Pende.htm
As an opportunity, the housing* component is just for the bankers. This would to have to excluded in the Planning Application because it contravenes the Structure Plan which has the area zoned for recreation and tourism. If a plan is not zoned in the right way a Public Inquiry is almost always necessary. The Councillors usually have to have some grounds for refusal (apart from just not liking the idea). Afterall, the Planning Officers have got to present a case against it.
(* The land allocated for housing is the only bit that is good enough.)
As a problem, it can be kyboshed quite easily. All that would have to happen is that West Sussex County Council (the highway department) would have to be prepared to testify that the transport arrangements cannot be complied with.
In reality, the road (A27) is more congested than Falmer, but less congested than Waterhall. Somewhere in between the two. I think WSCC could choose either to refuse it or approve it? This is the political element.
(PS: to accept the Pende scheme as an alternative would also mean accepting that the transport plan for Falmer is good enough.)
http://www.glaucus.org.uk/Pende.htm
As an opportunity, the housing* component is just for the bankers. This would to have to excluded in the Planning Application because it contravenes the Structure Plan which has the area zoned for recreation and tourism. If a plan is not zoned in the right way a Public Inquiry is almost always necessary. The Councillors usually have to have some grounds for refusal (apart from just not liking the idea). Afterall, the Planning Officers have got to present a case against it.
(* The land allocated for housing is the only bit that is good enough.)
As a problem, it can be kyboshed quite easily. All that would have to happen is that West Sussex County Council (the highway department) would have to be prepared to testify that the transport arrangements cannot be complied with.
In reality, the road (A27) is more congested than Falmer, but less congested than Waterhall. Somewhere in between the two. I think WSCC could choose either to refuse it or approve it? This is the political element.
(PS: to accept the Pende scheme as an alternative would also mean accepting that the transport plan for Falmer is good enough.)
Last edited:
sullyupthewing
New member
disgruntled h blocker said:
Porstmouth also poured millions of pounds into the Farlington application a few years ago selling there best players at that time to finance the plan only to have it scuppered by a few geese and Gummer.
I want Falmer and I have done my bit to support the push for it but we are a bit blinkered, we convince ourselves that it will be yes, we put forward many reasons why he will say yes but I work with an nimby and I hate to say it but he puts forward as many reason to say no.
The club must have a plan B.
Keep the faith and onward to Falmer.
The Large One
Who's Next?
Lord B, can you delete Perseus' posts on the grounds that they are inciting hatred and violins.
The Large One
Who's Next?
What are this NIMBY's reasons for saying no?sullyupthewing said:
For 'Plan B'. the club has always said that if Prescott believes somewhere else is more suitable than Falmer, the club would put a planning application there. It would be perverse, they say, that there would be yet another public inquiry on THAT site, when this one would have already cleared up all the issues.
sullyupthewing
New member
The Large One said:
General Election, destruction of downland, pollution, threat to wildlife, keeping that bit of land between B and H and Falmer green, all the usual ramblings and bullshit.
And that this new enquiry will deliver the death blow for the plan after the next election it is just a smoke screen.
I tend to give him a wide berth now I have tried to explain things to him but he will not listen, as far as he is concerned we are out to destroy the village and it way of life, I told him that is not true but it fell on deaf ears.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
But Prescott has had every opportunity to listen to all these arguments and he would have said NO already if he'd accepted his Inspectors' recommendations.sullyupthewing said:
The NIMBYs are clinging on desperately to the hope that there is some sort of funny political agenda, involving the timing of the general election or David Lepper's electoral prospects. They've even got Albion supporters thinking this.
There isn't. The Inquiry has been reconvened to enable the application to pass the final legal test that will allow planning permission to be given for a development in the AONB. If there is no alternative suitable site available, planning permission will be granted.
And if an alternative suitable site is available, then we can build it there.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
You know what, Percy? What pisses me off is that people (including Falmer Parish Council) probably get the impression that you know something about planning.perseus said:
You obviously don't.
If you did, you wouldn't have made FOUR glaring errors in your post:-
Zoning of development land isn't a matter for Structure Plans.
West Sussex County Council isn't the highway authority for the A27.
You'd also know that there is no mechanism any longer for the highway authority to direct refusal of a planning application.
The transport plan for Falmer is plainly "good enough". If it wasn't, Prescott would already have said NO to the planning application.
My mistakes.
Its the Local Plans that do the zoning.
Gawd knows who does the highway bit. From memory, it West Sussex County Council that veteod the road alignment plan on a local development. Or at least they were asked for their opinion.
I agree that the Falmer application is OK from a planning point of view in all respects. The South Downs Conservation Board did not express this opinion prior to the Public Inquiry. It is only a football stadium afterall. It is not a seven days a week hypermarket.
This begs the question: what could they kybosh Pende over?
Even Adur District Council weren't all that keen on the dumping plan (golf course). But I do not think they could think of a reason to refuse it?
I just wanna get the best f*****g stadium is the best location!
Its the Local Plans that do the zoning.
Gawd knows who does the highway bit. From memory, it West Sussex County Council that veteod the road alignment plan on a local development. Or at least they were asked for their opinion.
I agree that the Falmer application is OK from a planning point of view in all respects. The South Downs Conservation Board did not express this opinion prior to the Public Inquiry. It is only a football stadium afterall. It is not a seven days a week hypermarket.
This begs the question: what could they kybosh Pende over?
Even Adur District Council weren't all that keen on the dumping plan (golf course). But I do not think they could think of a reason to refuse it?
I just wanna get the best f*****g stadium is the best location!
Last edited:
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
And in the very next sentence....perseus said:
NOTHING and NO-ONE "begs the question" about Pende other than you Perseus. In one breath you accept that Falmer meets the criteria required, and in the next (and throughout this thread) you keep banging on and on about this mythical Pende site which is, from what Lord B says (and I trust his opinion), totally inferior. Not only that, the clubs planners / experts have conducted an exhaustive search for suitable sites, and not once have they mentioned Pende as a viable alternative.
Is it possible you may be.........mistaken on this ?
Last edited:
The Large One
Who's Next?
He's a nutter, Easy. Pure and simple. A complete nutter. 
I've just read through this thread (taken ages) and I have only these questions to ask:
1) Is Pende (Perseus I'm looking at you) available for Expansion? 'should' the Albion after 10years packing out 22,000 require an extra 5000 seats chucked in somewhere. Seeing as Falmer is NOT expandable (hardly ideal if we ever make the Prem I think you'd agree)
2) Even though it is in another county/wrong side of the Adur/whether or not it fits into Prescotts "Brighton & Hove" area, Is the site within the Football League (or FA) rules of being within 8miles of Brightons Centre? (I'm going on something old here that all new grounds must be within this boundary to stop any future MK Dons, I could be wrong on this though so confirmation please)
Even though I've been campaining for Falmer I have only done so on the notion that the club says its the only site and that there is no other, yes I have followed blindly like a sheep, mainly because I just want us to get a stadium...which could be a bad thing as has been stated by Southampton & Pompey who both followed ideals that their site was "the best" and they both end up going elsewhere (Pompey still pending but it counts for Southampton)
1) Is Pende (Perseus I'm looking at you) available for Expansion? 'should' the Albion after 10years packing out 22,000 require an extra 5000 seats chucked in somewhere. Seeing as Falmer is NOT expandable (hardly ideal if we ever make the Prem I think you'd agree)
2) Even though it is in another county/wrong side of the Adur/whether or not it fits into Prescotts "Brighton & Hove" area, Is the site within the Football League (or FA) rules of being within 8miles of Brightons Centre? (I'm going on something old here that all new grounds must be within this boundary to stop any future MK Dons, I could be wrong on this though so confirmation please)
Even though I've been campaining for Falmer I have only done so on the notion that the club says its the only site and that there is no other, yes I have followed blindly like a sheep, mainly because I just want us to get a stadium...which could be a bad thing as has been stated by Southampton & Pompey who both followed ideals that their site was "the best" and they both end up going elsewhere (Pompey still pending but it counts for Southampton)
London Calling
New member
Again fascinating.
I do consider that some of you provide the oxygen for Perceus flames.
Can I suggest you just ignore him the future.
LC
I do consider that some of you provide the oxygen for Perceus flames.
Can I suggest you just ignore him the future.
LC