Your Argus
TEXT your pictures, videos and messages to 80360. Start your message with SUPIC or email your tip-offs »
Opponents blast "completely wrong" decision
10:14am Tuesday 24th July 2007
Comments (19)Jacquetta Fewster, the director of the South Downs Society, said: "The decision to build this stadium is completely wrong.
"The countryside in this part of the South-East is so special it has been included within the boundary of the proposed national park, including much of the stadium site.
"The area has been described as the most beautiful of all the English chalk country'.
"This decision opens the way for this beautiful landscape to be destroyed, entombed under breeze block and concrete."
"The South Downs Society will campaign vigorously against any other scheme that would involve the expansion of an urban area like Brighton into this precious landscape."
Your Say YourThe Argus
Easy 10, says...
10:45am Tue 24 Jul 07
I wish you and your society well in your vigorous campaigns in the future. A small suggestion though - if you must campaign, at least ensure the land you are campaigning to protect is genuinely worth protecting. A tatty field next to a dual carriageway hardly falls within that bracket, no does it.
The Albion Massive, Falmer says...
10:48am Tue 24 Jul 07
Alex Evans, Sydney says...
11:45am Tue 24 Jul 07
Which let's face it is the main issue for the NIMBY's.
sean, brighton says...
11:50am Tue 24 Jul 07
"The area has been described as the most beautiful of all the English chalk country'
utter nonsense. when do you ever see crowds of walkers out & about "appreciating" the "beauty" of a field next to the university campus & dual carriageway? the Downs are a great asset but if I want to go walking on them I'll go somewhere where there is genuinely beautiful scenery. they stretch from Eastbourne to Winchester for goodness sake.
fieldy, woodingdean says...
12:26pm Tue 24 Jul 07
Plase can we just get on with this and get the maxinum benefits from it.
The decesion has been made lets stop arguing and fighting.
its all gone for far to long and cost far too much.
Scorpion, Newhaven says...
12:48pm Tue 24 Jul 07
But I agree with feildy - its gone on far too long and cost far too much time and money. Lets hope the goof-ups by those who should have known better are not an omen for the site.
Dave, Hastings says...
1:03pm Tue 24 Jul 07
Simon, New York City says...
2:28pm Tue 24 Jul 07
Martin W, Hassocks says...
2:39pm Tue 24 Jul 07
I applaud your aims to prevent Sussex countryside being built on but if you ever actually when to Falmer you cannot fail to spot,
1) A27
2) University buildings
3) Railway line
Doesn't really fit your criteria does it
ray ellerton, portslade says...
2:48pm Tue 24 Jul 07
Phil, PPL says...
3:11pm Tue 24 Jul 07
Brighton, and indeed Sussex, needs to expand its infrastructure and should not be confined by a load of Treehuggers!
How can it be right that the only real development which currently gets approved is in areas at high risk of flooding, like Eastbourne's Crumbles?
Let us all hope this project leads the City of Brighton, and all of Sussex from a backwater into a thriving modern area with opportunities and wealth for all!
Brian, Brighton says...
3:26pm Tue 24 Jul 07
Graham, Shoreham says...
4:26pm Tue 24 Jul 07
Brian wrote:Isnt it lovely. Please note the A27, railway line and numerous University buildings putting out light and noise 24/7.
Im with Jacquetta! She is RIGHT ! We dont want this eyesore ! Go somewhere else!
http://maps.live.com
/default.aspx?v=2&cp
=44.023938~-99.71&st
yle=h&lvl=4&tilt=-89
.875918865193&dir=0&
alt=7689462.6842358
woodie, woodingdean says...
5:19pm Tue 24 Jul 07
shaun, shoreham says...
8:12pm Tue 24 Jul 07
Brian wrote:yeh ok then brian. we are going nowhere apart from falmer every 2 weeks, get in.get used 2 it and give up ur pathetic fight
Im with Jacquetta! She is RIGHT ! We dont want this eyesore ! Go somewhere else!
T.Ruth, brighton says...
11:17pm Tue 24 Jul 07
Talk about inconsistency and hypocrisy, WHY do we have to put up with the self indulgent and NIMBY attitudes of those who get into positions of power for no other reasons than to protect their back yards regardless of what the general public want. Take Chichester District Council as an example, they went ahead, without a mandate, and spent hundreds of thousands of pounds of council tax payers money fighting the very idea of the proposed South Downs National Park, simply because they knew it would result in a loss of power and restrict the favours they could hand out to the privileged few land owners, who up until now have controlled most of Sussex and Hampshire without ever being challenged. Whereas, on the other hand, Lewes District Council supported the National Park scheme purely because they believed it would aid their fight against the Falmer football stadium, and because of their blind opposition to football in general, they have ignored the fact that this stadium could be a great asset to other sports as a training and competition venue and if they got on board before its too late they could still have some input into the design and overall use of the stadium in such a way that it will benefit Lewes in a positive way.
tina, brighton says...
7:40pm Mon 10 Dec 07
Bill, Brighton says...
5:40pm Sat 15 Dec 07
In this section
- Anti-noise protester jailed for dozens of Gatwick bomb hoaxes
- Outrage as Sussex council plan to spend £80 a day on schoolboy's cab
- Stolen Sussex pets are "used for food and fighting"
- Two swimmers safe after dramatic Littlehampton rescue
- People injured in string of crashes across Sussex
- Gas pipe spewed flames at Worthing arson blaze
- Brighton nurse takes his turn on Trafalgar Square's fourth plinth
- Shoreham yobs take pot shots at cows with paint gun
- Brighton band "banned from Brighton"
- Otter wins it by a nose in Brighton mascot derby
Sponsored Links
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Don Cropone, Brighton says...
10:39am Tue 24 Jul 07