TWO MORE SITES added to the list of alternatives to Falmer

[Rangdo]

What really winds me up is that these sites absolutely cannot succeed. Even ignoring all other considerations they are not in the conurbation of Brighton and Hove (Portslade is the furthest ward to the west) so should not even be allowed to be presented, but it's the club who have to foot the bill just reinforcing the fact that the nimby wankers know they can't win and are just trying to hang it out hoping the club will die. If the inquiry made the party who suggested the site pay for the investigation it would stop the arseholes wasting everyones time and money on blatantly pointless suggestions.

 

[GNF on Tour]

Once again people on here are blinkered to what the club thinks is right!!!

Persus has the right to his opinion, if he thinks penge is a good site for the Albion then he has the right to put across his point of view!

The does not make him a Wanker!

We all have the right to state where we think the ground should be. I ,in the early days did not think Falmer was the place for a football ground , but have come round more to the idea. It,s been interesting reading persus,s intelligent posts on the penge site.

do you really think it was him alone that convinced the falmer residents to include this site?!!

your all bleeting like sheep to the tune of Dick knight once again!!!

Thats all we need, an Horton apologist. Why the feck could this not all have happened back at the original enquiry.

 

[Reinelt 62]

The so-called Pende site is entirely within the area liable to flooding from the River Adur as shown in blue on the Environment Agency's Flood Risk Mapping. The Agency would categorically deny permission for the construction of a football stadium and all the necessary associated infrastructure works in this area.

This option is literally dead in the water.

Period.

End of story.

Goodnight.

 

[Vlad the Impala]

If it it is the land west to Shoreham Airport, they should have called it by its name: New Monks Farm (The name Pende is not on the maps, and the web site can only be accessed through NSC.).

FWit'sW, Perseus's letter to the authorities regarding a previous planning application at New Monks Farm:

"ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE AND COMMENTS ON
THE NEW MONKS FARM DEVELOPMENT BRIEF
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I do not want these comments to be seen as a totally negative response to the New Monks Farm Development Brief.

I see the site as being slap right bang in the middle of the Adur District and not as an outside of town development area, and at the head of the Adur Valley and therefore an important site where not just anything should be built.

I attended the public meeting in Lancing, where I asked a few questions which were not satisfactorily answered.

My main questions were:

1) What was the amount of spoil that was proposed to be dumped on the site?
2) What type of spoil was proposed to be dumped on the site?

Until these questions are asked, it is not possible to make any constructive comments.

This in turn leads on to some further questions:

3) How would the amount and the type of spoil be controlled?
4) What sanctions and legal liability would be implemented if unauthorised or illegal dumping occurred?
5) Would the land be suitable for converting to agricultural use after the dumping of spoil? (should the planned Golf Course become uneconomic).

In short time allowed to complete the questionnaire I have not been able to do more than just elementary research.

It does seem that at the present time that both the Dept. of Trade & Industry and the Farmers Union feel that all the controls over waste disposal sites, even for recreational purposes are seriously inadequate.

The present form of the Development Brief is certainly inadequate and does not contain nearly enough information for it to be passed even conditionally. This is the important bit. I do not think it should be passed subject to the developers providing assurances over the environmental concerns I have expressed.

I think that before that the Development Brief should even be considered until a full and thorough Environmental Impact Assessment has been prepared. I do not mean just a list of plant species and fauna. What I would expect for such an important site would be at least comparable with the plan for Southwick Beach, with the results open for public inspection and comment.

I think this would be preferable to a Public Enquiry in the first instance, and only if the results of such a consultation revealed such public concern should a Public Enquiry be justified.

The Environmental Impact Assessment would, of course, include soil analysis and drainage considerations in relation to neighbouring properties.

Already, further questions arise:

6) Would inert spoil improve the land as an asset, as impermeable spoil would do nothing to improve the drainage and is likely to become a nuisance if the land was to be put to another use?
7) Consideration should also be put for the short term use or misuse if the landscape is proposed to be altered substantially.

I am sure I have forgotten something in my haste to draw up this letter before the deadline of 17 November 2000.

e.g. technical details of how to get the top soil up from underneath the spoil, or importing in some more top soil to cover the spoil dumped.

My conclusion is that the Golf Course idea is not a practical proposition and that a better plan should be thought up. The Development Brief for a Golf Course should be rejected outright as well as the Planning Application. "

 

[Easy 10]

I'm a little surprised that this news has generated so much heat and what, almost nine pages. We discussed only recently on NSC the likely prospect that Falmer PC would propose additional sites, and if I'm not mistaken I think Tim Carder in the supporters' club newsletter named the precise two!

What is surprising is that Falmer PC have named their joke candidates so early when they appeared to win a significant concession from the new inspector that they could raise new sites AT THE INQUIRY ITSELF. In fact, I don't want to depress people further, but this option still appears open to anyone who fancies really pissing around in February.

You can't blame someone like Lord B being frustrated at the latest news after all the hard work he's put in the Falmer campaign and keeping us up to speed on NSC.

But I would take issue with aspects of his "doomsday scenario" he painted in that long posting of his.

What really were the chances, even without the Falmer PC jokers, of this inquiry running to timetable like clockwork and the OPDM turning round an decision WITHIN A MONTH before the April pre-General Election shutdown? Very remote, on both those variables I'd say. We should be stoical and realistic about the fact that we will probably have a decision after the General Election.

But I'm not so pessimistic about the decision being delayed much beyond that. True, Prescott will leave the restructured Department of the Environment and Regions, but his current advisers who have been doing most of the political leg-work will not, and they will be in place to hand the new minister the rubber-stamp.

The consequences of the delay do not look as serious as they did. We now know that McGhee will have his new contract and will have signed the current players he wants for next year and beyond and have got rid of those he doesn't. So the situation on squad building will not be too impaired. You have to wonder that these contract decisions reflect the fact that Dick Knight and Martin Perry are getting increasingly confident about the Falmer outcome.

Yes, it's annoying that the Falmer PC pissing around will cost us additional resources - although it's not really clear how much. Instead of bemoaning that fact, let's redouble our effort to support the Alive and Kicking campaign and not be ground down by our enemies.

To my mind, the Falmer PC jokers are an irritation, albeit one that will cost us a bit more time and money, but I reckon that's how they will appear to the inspector as well as they bumble though their incoherent evidence.

A much more serious threat will be the moneyed Lewes DC campaign pushing Toad's Hole and Sheepcote. This remains the number one target for our side to crush. These risible proposals from Falmer PC don't alter that fact.

I'd also like to say that NSC should give Perseus a break. Yes, he's a bit of an eccentric and has posted a cyber-forest of unhelpful postings over the years relating to our great Falmer fight, but it leaves a sour taste the way he's being abused at the moment. This is a great website, but it's the only time NSC really lets itself down when people get emotionally carried away to the point of a witch-hunt. Leave him alone.

At the end of the day, the bottom-line is that this inquiry process is a democratic one, and as frustrating as it is for us to accept the fact that other parties are going to utilise their democratic rights to the fullest extent in a way we don't like, I think it's ultimately pointless for us to spend too much time bitching about that.

Far better and far smarter for us to REALLY SMASH our enemies by continuing to raise money for the club and to throw our full weight behind the club and the Falmer For All campaign which is now so close to winning our greatest ever victory.

Damn fine post LI, and the best I've read in my game of catch-up tonight. I concur wholeheartedly.

On that note, I'm going to bed.

 

[perseus]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4011567,00.html

It calls on the authorities and parliament to investigate shortcomings and flaws in the law to stop the illegal dumping of waste and reform the landfill tax credit scheme which should have delivered £250m for community projects.

The report names golf courses and sporting facilities which have been used for dumping.

(extract)

Comment:

Don't quote me on the details, but what it boils down to is that the landowners can make £millions of dosh, by acquiring low grade farmland and dumping builders soil and bits on it.

The main grounds of my exemption was to prevent the dumping of contaminated soil and to make sure that the regulatory bodies were up to scratch.

The reason why the tax exemption applies is that if the authorities can be persuaded that dumping and final outcome is for community benefit for community projects or sporting uses of any kind. The usual ruse is to say they want golf courses, which are unlikely to be economic, but that is not the point. The money is made out of the dumping. At the end of the day the land is a notional golf course that would not make any money.

Essentially, the land is now not worth any money and is just a huge grassed over tip. Unless the owners are especially greedy and think they can then persuade the Council for a change of use.

However, if you have a convoluted mindset, it could just occur to the outsider, that the sporting and comunity use could just easily mean and community stadium (in this case stadia) and conservation area as a golf course.

 

[Juan Albion]

 

[Marc]

I'm bored so I'm doing more "Digging", heres a site about Pende and the proposed 18-Hole Golf Course (not sure of dates or outcome):
http://lancingvillage.co.uk/nature/MonksFarm/golf1.htm

Heres some Pics of where the Stadium would go presumably:

 

[Marc]

Heres a site about Plans for Shoreham Cement Works being Rejected:
http://www.adur.gov.uk/whats-new/press-room/2003/nr-03-115.htm

Now tell me that a roof over this to "blend in with the Downs" and a Stadium underneath WOULD'NT be amazing!
Shame the road access is terrible, theres no train station for a mile or two and it'd cost loads to clean out etc etc etc.....Shame really as it'd make a fantastic stadium site!

 

[Marc]

Found this very recent (November) article about an Architect comig to Brighton to chat about the Cement Works:
http://www.brightonbusiness.co.uk/htm/ni20041111.384596.htm

quote:

"The cement works is in the proposed South Downs National Park and has been earmarked by West Sussex County Council for a major leisure development. A recent planning application for 100 houses by part-owners of the site Hargreaves was declined and there is considerable resistance on the part of the county council to contemplate a large scale residential development although some housing element will be inevitable. Transport will also be an issue because the site is currently accessed by the narrow A283 which would not accommodate substantial numbers of visitors to a major leisure attraction."

 

[perseus]

Information on New Monks Farm:

Wheelwright Estates (the original owners) sold out to another firm of dumpers and the dumping is going ahead. When they have finished dumping the lorry loads of spoil, then they are meant to landscape the area into a golf course.

Don Turner (Brighton Councillor) still thinks that the area can be turned into a runway extension. Apart from the area being too short and runway will not fit, apart from an unanimous decision by Adur Council to oppose the runway, apart from all party political opposition to the scheme (because it is too silly), he is still maintaining this illusion (Evening Argus, yesterday).

 

[Rangdo]

Transport will also be an issue because the site is currently accessed by the narrow A283 which would not accommodate substantial numbers of visitors to a major leisure attraction."

Failed on sustainable transport requirements then. NEXT.

 

[Marc]

Information on New Monks Farm:

Wheelwright Estates (the original owners) sold out to another firm of dumpers and the dumping is going ahead. When they have finished dumping the lorry loads of spoil, then they are meant to landscape the area into a golf course.

So why are you pushing for a stadium if theres already firm plans for dumping spoil then buidling a golf course?

 

[perseus]

Bascially, because by the time the Albion have paid off Brighton University, paid for all the new roads at Falmer, etc. I think it is going over budget. It is £44 million for the stadium plus the cost of paying off Brighton University plus the cost of the road access junctions.

The only sensible suggestion would be to compare the comparative costs of the two sites and see which one makes better sense.

As the golf course is a non profit making scheme and the owners have already made their dosh, and they only paid farming land prices for the land in the first place, the land could hopefuly be had for such a low price. The tax exemption for dumping applies to all community and sporting projects. The way I see it, a stadium and conservation area qualifies as well.

But, mostly, because the site is bigger and better. But it has got to be cheaper as well to make it worthwhile. I am NOT suggesting that the Albion should go out of pocket or get lumbered with huge debts for either Falmer or Pende. The bankers can work it out.

 

[Marc]

Bascially, because by the time the Albion have paid off Brighton University, paid for all the new roads at Falmer, etc. I think it is going over budget. It is £44 million for the stadium plus the cost of paying off Brighton University plus the cost of the road access junctions.

The only sensible suggestion would be to compare the comparative costs of the two sites and see which one makes better sense.

As the golf course is a non profit making scheme and the owners have already made their dosh, and they only paid farming land prices for the land in the first place, the land could hopefuly be had for such a low price. The tax exemption for dumping applies to all community and sporting projects. The way I see it, a stadium and conservation area qualifies as well.

But, mostly, because the site is bigger and better. But it has got to be cheaper as well to make it worthwhile. I am NOT suggesting that the Albion should go out of pocket or get lumbered with huge debts for either Falmer or Pende. The bankers can work it out.

What about the Roads at Pende though? The coast road one lane, the dual carriageway to the north would need considerable work done to accomodate the extra traffic, that alone will be a simular price to the Falmer developemtn surely?
Then what do you do about the Trains, Shoreham & Lancing stations are a long way from Pende and yest Falmer station is much much closer in related terms.

 

[tedebear]

Perseus the simple fact that you are still engaging debate in alternate sites to me shows that you do want the Albion to go out of business due to the cost of this inquiry....everytime someone suggests an alternate location (that I must strees has been previously discarded for quantifiable reasons) it costs the club time and money to refute the claims.....

Can't you just put your faith in the club and let them do whats best - you are giving cannon fodder to the Falmer Parish Council in your very attempts to reinstate this very old debate...

 

[perseus]

Whatever infrastructure costs lots and lots of dosh. I am not under any illusions about this and it is easy to underestimate the cost which will be be at least £10 million, unless the highways department can put in a south-north relief road (this is unlikely because it would mean putting a bridge over the railway line).

Railtrack (or whatever they are called now) will not put in a railway station unless they can attract at least 250,000 passengers a year.

 

[tedebear]

I repeat :

Perseus the simple fact that you are still engaging debate in alternate sites to me shows that you do want the Albion to go out of business due to the cost of this inquiry....everytime someone suggests an alternate location (that I must strees has been previously discarded for quantifiable reasons) it costs the club time and money to refute the claims.....

Can't you just put your faith in the club and let them do whats best - you are giving cannon fodder to the Falmer Parish Council in your very attempts to reinstate this very old debate...

 

[Northstander]

 

[Rangdo]

Whatever infrastructure costs lots and lots of dosh. I am not under any illusions about this and it is easy to underestimate the cost which will be be at least £10 million, unless the highways department can put in a south-north relief road (this is unlikely because it would mean putting a bridge over the railway line).

IS PENDE IN ANY PART OF THE CONURBATION OF BRIGHTON AND HOVE?