On 16 Sep 2015 at 1:07pm Pete Manyata wrote:
As a relative newcomer to Lewes and the layers of planning bureaucracy here I found last night's debate (brilliantly chaired as usual by David Dimbleby) highly illuminating - and no more so than in the refusal of Lewes District Council to take part and what appeared to be the de facto gagging of Independent LDC councillor Ruth O'Keefe, who did appear, but was only able to (sarcastically) quote from LDC guidelines. The upshot of the tale seems to be that LDC is dominated by Conservatives from outlying towns and villages who have little concern for the social fabric of Lewes town, they just want the highest price for its assets.
On 16 Sep 2015 at 1:25pm Mavis wrote:
Don't we all want the highest price for their/our assets ?
On 16 Sep 2015 at 1:26pm Footie fan wrote:
They tried hard to stymie the Millennium Stadium
On 16 Sep 2015 at 1:51pm Pete Manyata wrote:
Yes, Mavis, but that seems to be their only consideration
On 16 Sep 2015 at 2:18pm Badger wrote:
Thanks Pete. Yes, that's the impression that many residents of Lewes have of the LDC and its development plans for Lewes. Take a look at the latest Lewes News and Ian Linton's pursuit of their strange, and illicit behavious or selling 49 sites around Lewes to developers that they did not technically own. The people of Lewes are being taken for a ride with no say in how they want their town to develop. Like many residents I would like to see a proper council concerned with Lewes, rather than this three tiered set of councils which I don't believe protects the interests of local residents, unless you are a particular property developer or estate agent of course.
On 16 Sep 2015 at 2:27pm Badger wrote:
In reply to Mavis, and wanting the highest price for the council's/ public assets (ideally we should feel that the council assets are our assets as we fund them!) all I can say is that exploitative development eventually lowers the value of surrounding properties, apart from having little concern for the local environment which I'm guessing most people who live in Lewes value, unless you are living in inner London, which we are not, yet!
On 16 Sep 2015 at 3:43pm Historian wrote:
Lewes has stagnated long enough, it's about time it moved into the 21st century. It's a living place, not a museum. Expect the thumbs down from the Phoenix mob.
On 16 Sep 2015 at 3:52pm Pete Manyata wrote:
A living place, but not a commuter dormitory
On 16 Sep 2015 at 5:15pm Robert wrote:
Great debate last night, 500 people angry and up in arms about Santon's ill-considered luxury housing development plans. Let's keep up the pressure, we can fight this!
On 16 Sep 2015 at 6:11pm De Niro wrote:
Well said Bob.
On 16 Sep 2015 at 6:25pm Badger wrote:
I would like to see development that the people of this town want to see. Development that's considerate of the rest of the town and the beautiful location we live in. I'd like to see homes which are affordable, and not an enclave of poorly built and over priced apartments or millionaire row riverside homes. I'd like to see spaces for local and new businesses. I'd like to have an influential say on what I do or don't want in my town and how my council tax is spent by LDC. If stagnation is the opposite to what LDC and Santon et al propose, then give me stagnation any day. At least that would stop an already traffic congested town being clogged up further
On 16 Sep 2015 at 7:03pm Digger wrote:
Well said Brock
On 16 Sep 2015 at 8:17pm swivel-eyed bigot wrote:
I think we should follow the enlightened development policies of many developing nations:
All the rich people in the actual town, with the poor and degenerate locals in shanty towns around the periphery.
And none of that silly "favela" nonsense. Housing for scum should sound like what it is.
On 16 Sep 2015 at 10:27pm Fairmeadow wrote:
It is perfectly possible for a planning authority to draw up a development brief for an allocated site that specifies the types of homes it is to include. Lewes prefers not to use these powers but to leave it to the developer. The developer naturally prefers to maximise their profits, which is most easily achieved by catering for DFLs/commuters rather than locals. Lewes DC seem content with this. Councillors could change this policy if they wanted to. Other local councils, like Mid Sussex, often exercise such powers.
On 17 Sep 2015 at 9:21am Merlin Milner wrote:
Housing that is truly affordable is needed. We also need good local jobs too and the North street site needs to also have factories and offices. With more jobs the town will thrive. More commuting will kill the town and turn it into a Waitrose theme park.
On 17 Sep 2015 at 10:00am Belladonna wrote:
Merlin, you're far too outspoken to be a Lewes town councillor. Tow the line, we don't want any radical ideas in Lewes do we ???
On 17 Sep 2015 at 4:18pm petemanyata wrote:
All I can say is that if I'd wanted to live to Haywards Heath I would have moved to Haywards Heath
On 18 Sep 2015 at 3:54pm Matthew Bird wrote:
It was mostly preaching to the converted which there is nothing wrong with, but a lot of people won't come to the Town Hall to a meeting hosted by David Dimbleby, and I can understand why. It was a good debate but I thought it despicable of LDC not to send official representation and as an ex-employee it's sad how low they have fallen in many peoples estimation. It's more than about the creativity though, even though it something I value. When some of the current occupants talk about the value of their creative space I wonder if they really have any sense of a wider community? I agree with Merlin. Sustainability is about social, environmental and economic for all and not just those with vested interests, whoever they are. Bye bye Leader of LDC