Day 14 - Fri 25th Feb - You're Going Home In A Sheepcote Ambulance / THE HUSTLER

I forgot to post on here last night the Website address for the friends of Sheepcote Valley. It has their email address on there so feel free to send them a message of thanks.

www.sheepcote.org.uk

Just like the Albion at Withdean, the Friends of Sheepcote Valley run regular litter patrols. Their website suggests that these are a bit like NSC, only face-to-face, real-life stuff:-

Litter picking! Rather a generic term!

Crisp packets are plentiful, but the odd motorbike has been found, widgets, credit card (out of date), and other ‘spoils’. We have protective gloves, and helping hands, so you won’t get too ‘involved’!

This time of year is good, because the undergrowth has died back making access easier.

It sounds unappealing, but most people find it strangely alluring and get great satisfaction from seeing real improvement for relatively undemanding efforts.

Do come along - we will not mind if you decide it is not really your thing and spend most of your visit chatting to others - never frowned upon, in fact actively encouraged.

Who suggested Sheepcote Valley?

None other than the South (or Sussex) Downs Conservation Board who are meant to be protecting the downs. They are doing nothing of the sort.

They are acting for the interests of minority farmers at the expense of the public.

The people in Lancing know it over Lancing Clump. in Shoreham over Mill Hill, all the Albion supporters know over Falmer, now the people of Sheepcote Valley know it, and it looks like the Friends of Whitehawk Hill know it as well.

Wake up! Who is responsible, because it is people that make decisions?

Indeed. We'd probably end up being the smelliest bunch of fans in the entire League - they'd be selling Lynx at the turnstiles. Mr White didn't seem to have ANYTHING to say about the issues Ms Hawkins presented on walking.

Click to expand...

"You only sing when your minging"

None of the major players at the Inquiry appears to be mobility-impaired. Maybe it's time they were issued with stout walking boots and taken on a series of rambles from the nearest station to the various sites. Should knock on the head once and for all the issue of what's realistically walkable on matchdays, and what's not.

perseus said:

Who suggested Sheepcote Valley?

None other than the South (or Sussex) Downs Conservation Board who are meant to be protecting the downs. They are doing nothing of the sort.

Click to expand...

Er ... no.

Sheepcote Valley was suggested by Lewes District Council.

Rather a nice reply here from Jane Hawkins of the Friends of Sheepcote Valley (the STAR of the Inquiry on Friday). Jane read my report after Dave in Gloucester put it on his website bhafc.cjb.net, and responded:

Dear Easy 10, just a quick note to say how much FSV enjoyed your detailed report of our appearance on Friday. I laughed so much the tears stopped me reading it for a while. You seemed to have listened to every word. We'll get you out there looking for lesser spotted bogwort yet! For even more bizarre details of the sexual proclivities of bug life, take a look at Dave Bangs' book 'Whitehawk Hill'. Re alien spaceship - yes, Close Encounters was the vision I had in mind. Meant it as a compliment to the stadium design, but think on balance we'd much rather have the caravan club... Re Naismith - it was my ambition to get that in if I had the slightest opportunity. Have to say that the look on Mr White's face when I delivered the coup de grace was an even better present than seeing the weasel and young. Only Mr Brier and I had the privilege. Congrats on the win over Millwall. Best wishes from the Rambler.

Top bombing Thanks Jane - and bloody well played on Friday. Although not directly supporting the Albion, you had White on the run to the point where he didn't even want Clay questioning you - and that battering you gave at the end of your presentation almost had me up and out of my seat cheering.

Thanks again.

Good reply from Jane Hawkins, and an excellent display from her and her Sheepcote friends on friday.

Brilliant stuff.

And how good to see that it's not just us who like to see Lewes District Council squirm.

Just read this thread. Excellent stuff.

Belatedly - I chose to take Harty's advice over the weekend to "get out more" - here is my report from Friday.


Many Albion supporters had gone into this Public Inquiry with the thought that the strongest argument for Falmer was that a stadium there could be built without creating serious traffic problems. If Falmer had a weakness, it seemed to be that the countryside lobby were concerned about the impact on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

As the Inquiry has unfolded, it has become clear that most of the alternative sites would be worse than Falmer, when it came to traffic. But what if transport turned out to be not the most important issue? Would that mean that we’d lose Falmer, if a site could be found that wasn’t as sensitive a location in the minds of the countryside lobby?

We were beginning to wonder if that alternative site might be called Sheepcote Valley. OK, there’d be cars parked all over the place on match days and some of us would find it a pain to get there, but it’s only an old tip that nobody really cares about. We’d have a new stadium and at least we wouldn’t have to put up with those moaning neighbours in Falmer Village.

Last Friday’s session at the Inquiry changed all that. We learned that, far from being “just an old tip”, Sheepcote Valley is a much loved, much used, genuine area of natural beauty, home to badgers, weasels, reptiles and forty species of breeding birds. It’s an important stop-off point for migrating birds, and home to 1,763 pied wagtails.

There is plenty of unimproved chalk grassland in Sheepcote Valley, far more attractive than the farmers’ fields in the neighbouring Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Among 56 varieties of plant (why, oh why couldn’t they have got Heinz to sponsor the survey?) bee orchids flourish, by conning gentleman bees to try to mate with them. Other little flying creatures, particularly butterflies, have more success in breeding.

East Brighton Park was first laid out in 1825. The Valley is home to Whitehawk Football Club and a Caravan Club site that has won a gold David Bellamy award and supports an imaginative programme of nature conservation.

The restoration of the former landfill tip has not resulted in a “brownfield site”, but has produced restored downland terracing, using chalkland turf removed imported from Bevendean. Even the “derelict tarmac” has a purpose, as a habitat for lizards who use it to bask in the sun.

The area is actively managed, and its status as protected countryside is confirmed in the new Local Plan. A continuing cycle of work projects ensures that sensitive restoration work will carry on for years. And, unlike the AONB near Falmer, hundreds of local people are committed, regular users of the Valley, proving its status as a very important community asset.

We learned all of this from the evidence of three wonderful witnesses – Jane Hawkins, Harry Pugh and Ann Barker – who plainly love their local green space and are totally committed to seeing it flourish as public open space. Not because they don’t want a stadium, but because they have been working for years to make that open space what it is today.

And that’s the point. Falmer has “views”. Sheepcote Valley is used by people – real people – who are involved in creating the treasure that attracts folk to use it. Health improvement is an important objective of the people who use Sheepcote Valley, with an established and expanding programme of HealthWalks. Nowhere else in East Brighton offers the same opportunity for such enriching public access.

Those of us who heard this evidence were left in no doubt about the passion that the Friends of Sheepcote Valley have. They hadn’t just turned up at the Inquiry to grumble about the prospect of a football stadium. They were there to persuade the Inspector that, in environmental terms, the Valley was a public asset that cannot be dismissed as merely an old tip.

It worked for me. Ms Hawkins, Mr Pugh and Mrs Barker know what they are talking about. And they didn’t crumple under questioning from Lewes District Council, who plainly aren’t bothered about the Valley.

Indeed, Robert White, the lawyer for Lewes, was obviously rattled by what he heard. His attempts to question Mr Pugh got him a yellow card from the Inspector. “Please be less aggressive in your questioning”.

But one of the best moments of the Inquiry came when Jane Hawkins tentatively asked if she could say something about the transport evidence that Lewes will soon be presenting. The thing was, she said, that the expert transport consultant employed by Lewes District Council didn’t seem to understand Naismith’s Rule. What? Naismith’s Rule. It allows hill walkers to calculate how much extra walking time it takes to cover a route, taking account of the fact that there are hills involved.

What this meant was that the claim that Sheepcote Valley is an easy walk from railway stations is simply nonsense. The hills would mean that walkers – and we are not talking about fit, experienced ramblers here – would sit shivering in pools of cold sweat while they watched their football at a Sheepcote Stadium. “It would put people off walking for life”.

So there we have it. Sheepcote is supported by people who have no idea of the transport issues. It is supported by people who don’t understand the importance of public open spaces. It is worse than Falmer, whichever way you look at the arguments.

All in all, a very good day at the Inquiry.

Question for LB if I may?
You said that Mr Brier may well use some of the time between 9th of March and the inquiry resuming in April to write up His report.
Is He allowed to do this before the closing statements?I would have thought that He would have to wait for the closing submissions before starting His report.

s.stubbs said:

Question for LB if I may?
You said that Mr Brier may well use some of the time between 9th of March and the inquiry resuming in April to write up His report.
Is He allowed to do this before the closing statements?I would have thought that He would have to wait for the closing submissions before starting His report.

Click to expand...

A substantial part of the Report consists of the Inspector's summary of the evidence that he has received. Quite a lot of that is written evidence, or oral evidence that has come from parties who won't be making closing statements.

He will also use the time to make further visits to the various sites.

You're right in one respect, though. He shouldn't reach his final conclusions until the closing submissions have been heard.

Lord Bracknell said:

A substantial part of the Report consists of the Inspector's summary of the evidence that he has received. Quite a lot of that is written evidence, or oral evidence that has come from parties who won't be making closing statements.

He will also use the time to make further visits to the various sites.

You're right in one respect, though. He shouldn't reach his final conclusions until the closing submissions have been heard.

Click to expand...

Cheers for clearing that up.