OK, so what ARE the other possible sites and why can't we build a stadium there?

[Lammy]

Shoreham harbour is totally unviable due to the HUGE expence in not only acquiring the land from multiple owners but also preparing the land. The road transport links are nothing short of appauling! And there is no current rail link option. To be honest this a non-starter. Very easy to dismiss.

If I'm honest the inquiry is bound to centre around Sheepcote Valley as that is the one reccomended by H***e.

Sheepcote valley has no rail links. Poor road links and only two years ago was a land fill site!

 

[Marc]

its still got the works railway going into it apparently - that could easily be used to transport fans

surely it is out of the about of miles it has to be to the city?

that was dug up years ago, the line of the track is still there but then you look at cost...millions...out the window!

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

If I'm honest the inquiry is bound to centre around Sheepcote Valley as that is the one reccomended by H***e.

Sheepcote valley has no rail links. Poor road links and only two years ago was a land fill site!

and its near whitehawk

 

[Scotty Mac]

and its near whitehawk

'nuff said

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

stop panicking people

the only suitable site is falmer- that was proved ages ago

 

[Jesus Gul]

Goldstone Retail Park

Knock down the sheds and the Puegeot dealership

Build a tram system into Brighton, Hove and afar

Oh sorry forgot this was the UK and not Portugal, Korea, Japan, France

 

[ditchy]

stop panicking people

the only suitable site is falmer- that was proved ages ago

my worry is that opinions change over the years ..so what was deemed unsuitable a few years ago may not be now ...

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

my worry is that opinions change over the years ..so what was deemed unsuitable a few years ago may not be now ...

fair point

i think it was you who raised the toads hole debate on another thread- i am now semi-worried about this site

 

[Lammy]

stop panicking people

the only suitable site is falmer- that was proved ages ago

Who's panicing?

This is a win win situation as far as I'm concerned. This thread has demonstarted that the only other site even capable of sustaining a football stadium without bringing the city to it's knees every other week is Waterhall.

Highly unlikely that Waterhall will get the nod! So we get Falmer. If not we get Waterhall. What's the drawback?

 

[Scotty Mac]

as long as we get a stadium, i couldn't give a toss where it is

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

as long as we get a stadium, i couldn't give a toss where it is

i think the crocs lair is a viable option

 

[Scotty Mac]

i think the crocs lair is a viable option

haha. shall we offer it as a groundsharing option

 

[ditchy]

fair point

i think it was you who raised the toads hole debate on another thread- i am now semi-worried about this site

Not quilty yr honour !! mentioned waterhall but not Toads

 

[y2dave]

I've got a few questions that really shouldn't have anything to do with football but here goes:

If the new enquiry finds another site is better suited for development on planning grounds, meets the criteria wll we have the required approval to go ahead and build on this site? Could you have a public enquiry into the results of a public enquiry ? Would it go straight to a judicial review?

I still can't see any proof except Lord Bracknells opinion that all we have to do is dismiss the other sites and Falmer is ours. Was this stated in the letter/report or is it a matter of interpetation ?

Is being able to support a capacity of 22,000 one of the criteria for the new enquiry? If so does this rule out Withdean which I still think will be the site the Nimbys ***** will go for?

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

I've got a few questions that really shouldn't have anything to do with football but here goes:

If the new enquiry finds another site is better suited for development on planning grounds, meets the criteria wll we have the required approval to go ahead and build on this site? Could you have a public enquiry into the results of a public enquiry ? Would it go straight to a judicial review?

I still can't see any proof except Lord Bracknells opinion that all we have to do is dismiss the other sites and Falmer is ours. Was this stated in the letter/report or is it a matter of interpetation ?

Is being able to support a capacity of 22,000 one of the criteria for the new enquiry? If so does this rule out Withdean which I still think will be the site the Nimbys ***** will go for?

there are a number of criteria that justify a site being 'suitable'

things such as cost, impact on society, access etc.(lord b could give a full list i'm sure)

 

[¤DãŃn¥ §êãGüLL¤]

Benfield Valley?

 

[Lammy]

Is being able to support a capacity of 22,000 one of the criteria for the new enquiry? If so does this rule out Withdean which I still think will be the site the Nimbys ***** will go for?

yes, so Withdean is OUT!

 

[West Hoathly Seagull]

Benfield Valley?

I always used to think that was suitable. Near to the bypass, walking distance from Portslade station, but then they built a Sainsbury's on that site. Mind you, Portslade station would probably be too small. Isn't it one of the ones you have to only travel in the front four coaches or something? Also, just imagine it. Dave the gaffer and the Mile Oak Mafia up in arms.

 

[Biscuit]

so has JP suggested the alternative sites? And if not, who does suggest them?

 

[¤DãŃn¥ §êãGüLL¤]

I always used to think that was suitable. Near to the bypass, walking distance from Portslade station, but then they built a Sainsbury's on that site. Mind you, Portslade station would probably be too small. Isn't it one of the ones you have to only travel in the front four coaches or something? Also, just imagine it. Dave the gaffer and the Mile Oak Mafia up in arms.

Not sure about the trains but there's still space there?