Brighton and Hove Albion say they have investigated all alternative sites for their proposed stadium.
Jonathan Clay, representing the club at the public inquiry into the Falmer scheme, said none of the places suggested by Falmer Parish Council was suitable for a 22,000-seat football ground.
He said the club had provided evidence to the Hove Town Hall hearing on why the sites should not be used.
Falmer parish councillor Tom Carr told the inquiry Brighton station, Shoreham Harbour, Withdean, Toad's Hole Valley, Waterhall and Sheepcote Valley were all potential alternatives.
He said: "We would prefer someone independent to look at all the alternative sites.
"Our case is there are alternative sites to Falmer. We have not attempted to pick a site."
Mr Clay said Brighton station was no longer realistic because it was about to be redeveloped.
He said significant land reclamation would be needed and 16 businesses moved before the club could build at Shoreham Harbour and port authorities were against it.
The club's advisers believed Withdean would be unsafe for fans arriving and leaving a 22,000-seat stadium while Waterhall was ecologically sensitive and inside the proposed South Downs national park.
Toad's Hole Valley was ecologically more valuable than Falmer.
Mr Clay said marginal sites, such as Newhaven East and the Upper Beeding cement works, had also been investigated and rejected.
He said: "The club has considered every site Falmer Parish Council says it should consider."
Mr Carr, the final witness to give evidence for Falmer and Rottingdean Parish Councils, said Shoreham Harbour had good travel links and Toad's Hole Valley was in worse condition than Falmer, providing a "real alternative".
He said Waterhall had potential and Withdean was a brownfield site.
Other brownfield sites, such as Brighton station, had been available at the time of the 1999 referendum into the stadium proposal.
More objectors to building the stadium at Village Way North, including Lewes District Council and the Society of Sussex Downsmen, will put their case next week.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article