Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Why I can't support Falmer
- Thread starter chips and gravy
- Start date
Colbourne Kid
Member
- Sep 19, 2003
- 351
To my mind Waterhall always has been the best option for the following reasons:
1. Location. On the "right" side of Brighton so that visiting fans arriving by car can easily locate it.
2. Direct access from both the A23 and the bypass.
3. A "Parkway" station could be built on the site offering:
a) A commuter park and ride for London, and
b) a shoppers park and ride for the town centre ... plus of course
c) a rail station for footy fans.
4. Plenty of space for a decent amount of parking.
5. No NIMBY group nearby.
It would be interesting to know whether £2.5m spent on convincing the powers that be about the benefits of Falmer could have been better spent on making a case for Waterhall.
Yes, yes, yes, I know about the site being the "wrong" side of the bypass, but nothing is set in tablets of stone.
WATERHALL FOR ALL!!
1. Wrong side of Brighton for the majority of Brighton fans
2. Only one road in (Mill Road) with restricted tunnel. Then through another restrcited bridge under A27. No alternate route for emergency situations. Therefore build road across golf course or large junction with flyover off railway to supply stadium. Can't come off A27 bank is too steep for road.
3. Can't build a station there it is too close to tunnels. Even if possible, would have to close Preston Park. Both decisions would be liable to Public Inquiry (ie two Inquiries) cost in tens of millions.
4. Parking space is limited for a new football stadium of 22000 to about 1500 spaces. This is Government policy (Planning Policy Guidance 17). So it doesn't matter how big the area is, you can't build car park spaces.
5. Will be in National Park so all the same NIMBY groups as at Falmer.
Good idea - eh!
1. Location. On the "right" side of Brighton so that visiting fans arriving by car can easily locate it.
2. Direct access from both the A23 and the bypass.
3. A "Parkway" station could be built on the site offering:
a) A commuter park and ride for London, and
b) a shoppers park and ride for the town centre ... plus of course
c) a rail station for footy fans.
4. Plenty of space for a decent amount of parking.
5. No NIMBY group nearby.
It would be interesting to know whether £2.5m spent on convincing the powers that be about the benefits of Falmer could have been better spent on making a case for Waterhall.
Yes, yes, yes, I know about the site being the "wrong" side of the bypass, but nothing is set in tablets of stone.
WATERHALL FOR ALL!!
1. Wrong side of Brighton for the majority of Brighton fans
2. Only one road in (Mill Road) with restricted tunnel. Then through another restrcited bridge under A27. No alternate route for emergency situations. Therefore build road across golf course or large junction with flyover off railway to supply stadium. Can't come off A27 bank is too steep for road.
3. Can't build a station there it is too close to tunnels. Even if possible, would have to close Preston Park. Both decisions would be liable to Public Inquiry (ie two Inquiries) cost in tens of millions.
4. Parking space is limited for a new football stadium of 22000 to about 1500 spaces. This is Government policy (Planning Policy Guidance 17). So it doesn't matter how big the area is, you can't build car park spaces.
5. Will be in National Park so all the same NIMBY groups as at Falmer.
Good idea - eh!
I have found that the most people that do not enthusastically support Falmer will think that Waterhall is the best option.
Now, I am not going to condemn them because for several years I had the same thoughts. It I still cannot be ruled out, but I think it it is best to point the following problems (problems can be overcome but this takes time):
1) The Highway department will not allow traffic lights and may veto any development on traffic grounds. This means that the development will require a specialised road junction (even if allowed) and single lane carriageways work out at £2 million a kilometre. Junctions cost more. The cost would be prohibitive even if allowed with an ancillary development e.g. supermarket (might work then).
2) Lord Bassam has dogmatically said that development should not be allowed north of the by-pass and any exponents have missed the Local Plan as advertised by Hoile. Basically the plan is stymied and would need another Public Inquiry and the current show will have taken five years by April 2004. (I think Lord Bassam is wrong, but most people seem to agree with him.)
3) There are legal and natural justice reasons why public open spaces cannot be removed from public use into the private domain from existing users. This will have to be dealt with.
4) I do not hold with the railway station veto, but somebody would have to pay for the station as Railtrack will not. (Possibly with a supermarket?)
5) The Downs lobby will kick up a fuss and the political will to overcome such objections just ain't there is they cannot sort out Falmer. Maybe you can vote the whole lot out and get new politicians in but the time scale is four years with a miracle.
Don't blame me. I wish Waterhall could work but I cannot see how it can. Persuade me if you want, but I cannot see how
PS: Tell that turkey that there is somebody with a meat cleaver after him.
Now, I am not going to condemn them because for several years I had the same thoughts. It I still cannot be ruled out, but I think it it is best to point the following problems (problems can be overcome but this takes time):
1) The Highway department will not allow traffic lights and may veto any development on traffic grounds. This means that the development will require a specialised road junction (even if allowed) and single lane carriageways work out at £2 million a kilometre. Junctions cost more. The cost would be prohibitive even if allowed with an ancillary development e.g. supermarket (might work then).
2) Lord Bassam has dogmatically said that development should not be allowed north of the by-pass and any exponents have missed the Local Plan as advertised by Hoile. Basically the plan is stymied and would need another Public Inquiry and the current show will have taken five years by April 2004. (I think Lord Bassam is wrong, but most people seem to agree with him.)
3) There are legal and natural justice reasons why public open spaces cannot be removed from public use into the private domain from existing users. This will have to be dealt with.
4) I do not hold with the railway station veto, but somebody would have to pay for the station as Railtrack will not. (Possibly with a supermarket?)
5) The Downs lobby will kick up a fuss and the political will to overcome such objections just ain't there is they cannot sort out Falmer. Maybe you can vote the whole lot out and get new politicians in but the time scale is four years with a miracle.
Don't blame me. I wish Waterhall could work but I cannot see how it can. Persuade me if you want, but I cannot see how
PS: Tell that turkey that there is somebody with a meat cleaver after him.
Last edited:
PS: If anybody really believes in Waterhall, they can draw up a plan with all the problems resolved. If they are prepared to go to the trouble of doing this, it could at least be treated as an alternative plan if Falmer goes pear-shaped.
It is a waste of time though. It has NO chance.
It is a waste of time though. It has NO chance.
Last edited:
I do think we need to clearly know, 100% why Withdean won't do. I've got someone saying to me that the club could stay at Withdean. It could run at a loss, only have gates of 10,000 etc but it would survive. Even if the club had no chance of greater things.
London Irish
Well-known member
Withdean is simply not sustainable if we wanted the remain a Nationwide league club. The Colbourne kid on page 2 has exhaustively demonstrated why development of the ground is impossible - it is a planners' nightmare with about every sensitive thing you care to name going on all around the stadium from valuable environmental sites, to independent businesses, dire infrastructural, traffic and safety problems and residential homes within a miscued Trevor Benjamin kick away.
If we could survive the ill will of the locals by staying put (possible I guess but a very dishonourable course given the promises we made), the lack of corporate revenue facilities and the dire quality and limited nature of the current capacity would not allow us to fund even our current squad without finding a new sugar daddy willing to pump in huge sums of money for ever more. The likelihood is we would soon be only be able to afford non-league players and they would sooner or later relegate the club down to their appropriate level with Crawley and the like. I suppose it wouldn't be death, more just like bleeding for ever more, a kind of prolonged and open-ended death agony.
On that happy note, all that is left to be said is:
WE WANT FALMER!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:falmerspi :falmerspi :falmerspi :falmerspi :falmerspi :falmerspi
If we could survive the ill will of the locals by staying put (possible I guess but a very dishonourable course given the promises we made), the lack of corporate revenue facilities and the dire quality and limited nature of the current capacity would not allow us to fund even our current squad without finding a new sugar daddy willing to pump in huge sums of money for ever more. The likelihood is we would soon be only be able to afford non-league players and they would sooner or later relegate the club down to their appropriate level with Crawley and the like. I suppose it wouldn't be death, more just like bleeding for ever more, a kind of prolonged and open-ended death agony.
On that happy note, all that is left to be said is:
WE WANT FALMER!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:falmerspi :falmerspi :falmerspi :falmerspi :falmerspi :falmerspi
Best left unsaid: I think we are on borrowed time at Withdean. I have always been surprised that the Withdean residents have not take legal action to close the stadium down on health and safety grounds.
To put in other words. Suppose you had a fatal disease and you were waiting on a Government decision whether they are going to allow you be cured.
I think even the Albion are by necessity pretending Withdean is not terminally ill.
To put in other words. Suppose you had a fatal disease and you were waiting on a Government decision whether they are going to allow you be cured.
I think even the Albion are by necessity pretending Withdean is not terminally ill.