Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think


Lewes Forum New message

Neighbourhood Plan

8
5
On 3 Oct 2015 at 12:09pm Fairmeadow wrote:
Some good points about local versus commuter demand for new housing in the Phoenix thread.
A neighbourhood plan can include policies to control the types of housing developed in a town, and so can influence what developers build. As an example, the Ringmer neighbourhood plan requires a majority of two and three bed houses in each development and significant provision for older and disabled people. Will the Lewes neighbourhood plan include policies like this designed to ensure that the majority of new housing is suitable for the town's own needs? And, unlike the new development in Cliffe, priced to sell to Londoners only?
8
15
On 3 Oct 2015 at 7:15pm Bod wrote:
Careful Fairmeadow, you'll upset some of the strangely gung-ho supporters of the development, who can't point out any benefits to the town off his plan. They might as well just be saying, "Great, more traffic in a National Park, and fewer affordable houses for any local person, as long as we can make money from commuters!" I'm surprised no one has thought of turning the castle into luxury apartments... Surely a historic Norman castle doesn't fit some of these peoples demands for change!
8
8
On 3 Oct 2015 at 10:18pm Earl of Lewes wrote:
There seem to be some very vocal supporters of the development on this forum, but they're not the usual names and I can't help wondering who they are.
12
9
On 3 Oct 2015 at 11:09pm Lewes wrote:
Some local residents see things in a different light and embrace change as there are real benefits with the development that I believe will work harmoniously with lewes and make it even better and build on what we currently have.
10
6
On 4 Oct 2015 at 7:08am Withit wrote:
What's the matter Earl of lewes prehaps you don't like people that don't agree with your view , a lot of us get fed up with actually speaking up for change then get vilified for having a opinion which is why we are often silent which no doubt will happen again now for the comments you make , there is another view in town that wants to work with and embrace change
4
1
On 4 Oct 2015 at 7:51am Realist wrote:
Good in theory but conveniently the NP has been delayed so much that controversial developments such as North Street, Old Magistrates Court, Waitrose, bus station etc will have been waved through planning before it is effective.
4
4
On 4 Oct 2015 at 8:25am Achilles wrote:
Not keen on the santon plan.-Regarding the point made by withit, people who are moderate or right leaning are less interested in forums and more focused on doing in mho. They have little interest in debate for its own sake unlike extremists of either end.
That's why labour supporters believed they were going to win the last election, all their conservative voting friends couldn't see any benefit in engaging with them.
8
5
On 4 Oct 2015 at 11:24am Earl of Lewes wrote:
@Withit - I really don't mind anyone who disagrees with my views. Indeed, I like to read an opposing argument, as it's far more interesting than just seeing the same opinion over and over again. I'm not against embracing change, but I just want to know more about how the town will benefit.
The way I see the probem is this:
1. A high net migration and surge in foreign investors buying London properties is forcing thousands of people to move away from the captital.
2. Lewes is one of the most desirable commuter towns and the demand for houses here has trebled the prices in just over a decade.
3. Even if we build new housing, the supply will still outstrip demand and prices will continue to rise beyond most people's means.
So I'd be wary of putting too much faith in 450 homes - in the great scheme of things, it won't make much of a difference. So please can someone tell me what the other benefits will be?
14
7
On 4 Oct 2015 at 11:49am lewes wrote:
New jobs in a new infrastructure, including a doctors surgery, nursery, dentists, addutional retail staff such as cafes bars and resturants, building work, all trades and working space for hire. This is additional as most of the existing businesses will be rehoused some have already had their new premises developed at malling brooks such as the soap factory and wenban smith. Other benefits are 416 additional houses for the town including social housing and property offered to lewes residents for 1st refusal at 20% below market rates. The riverside walkway which opens up the river bank and enables it to be used by all, connecting cliffe bridge to wileys bridge. A new bridge across the river from near tesco's to the new development which connects malling back up with the rest of the town. As I said before this is really maximising potential for this very under used space and will look superb when complete! Very exciting times, the one way systems will also be improved and there will be an underground car park which makes so much sense!
10
7
On 4 Oct 2015 at 11:59am lewes wrote:
Also forgot to mention that they will be adding flood defences so another massive improvement for the town paid for by the developer.
18
9
On 4 Oct 2015 at 12:12pm Southstreeter wrote:
Why are people so against change ? It's staggeringly selfish and narrow minded . Reading this forum would make someone who dared to be from "outside" think all lewesians were happy living in their 19th century bubble and marrying their cousins . The Phoenix is an ugly brownfield eyesore. Time for change
3
6
On 4 Oct 2015 at 12:42pm Selfish Git wrote:
What's wrong with being selfish? Resist change, it's over-rated
6
6
On 4 Oct 2015 at 12:47pm Earl of Lewes wrote:
@Southstreeter - It's far from selfish and narrow minded. I just think that Lewes is a very special town and we have a responsibility to future generations to tread very carefully. Why shouldn't they enjoy what we've had? I'm not necessarily against the North Street development, but I just wanted to hear some stronger arguments. @Lewes came up with a more persuasive case in the last post.
I suppose my views have been strongly affected by working in Crawley, which is a good example of a small town ruined by good intentions.
7
6
On 4 Oct 2015 at 5:46pm Bod wrote:
Completely agree with Earl of Lewes, although personally I like the look of the old industrial buildings in Lewes. There is no reason why some of the nicer historical buildings can't in some cases be converted into flats etc. i don't think change for change's sake is a good enough argument. We've got a beautiful town and there is no reason why, if change is wanted and needed, that we can't do it in a good way that offers useful things to the town as a whole. Let's not just have characterless over-priced developments that no one local can afford and which cut off access to the river and countryside for the rest of the town to enjoy. I think it's selfish to impose these developments on the rest of us, especially if the traffic infrastructure can't support it. I dislike the way that traffic improvements are not taken more seriously by East Sussex County Council, or is it Lewes District? Leaving this to the developers who have just introduced much more traffic because of their schemes is not adequate, or I think desirable. I can see that 400 plus new homes bring in extra council tax for the councils, but does this money actually benefit Lewes roads, schools etc?
8
6
On 5 Oct 2015 at 8:56am Clifford wrote:
It must be very flattering, Webbo, that the Santos people spend so much time writing favourable comments on the North Street development and giving themselves the thumbs up. They must believe the forum is very influential to be taking so much trouble.
11
3
On 5 Oct 2015 at 9:18am Withit wrote:
Clifford that is pretty rude , I have lived in the town for over 20 years are we simply not allowed to air opinions if they simply conflict with your own - sad - well maybe some of us in the town want to see change
7
2
On 5 Oct 2015 at 10:44am Earl of Lewes wrote:
@Withit - For someone who's not allowed to air their opinions, you're doing a pretty good job.

I certainly want to hear other people's views, because I want to understand all of the issues. I'm more swayed by the arguments that it will be nice to have a riverside area that can be enjoyed by all and add something to the town. I think the arguments about progress and not being selfish are very fishy.

It's a pity we can't have a local referendum about something so important, rather than leaving the big decisions to people who all have their own agenda.
2
5
On 5 Oct 2015 at 11:02am snoopy wrote:
@ Clifford. Thumbs up or down on this forum means very little to me because honesty, truth & and facts mean far more. Yes it is a now a common practice by Governments and businesses to post 'false flags' demonstrated by the Russian case last year. There are even (legal) internet endorsement companies.
People stealing usernames (like on the Phoenix post below) and multi posters peeve me off more.
I do know of one regular multi poster who was recently clever enough to boast on a certain closed forum how he revels winding people up in his many different guises and what he thinks of the good people of Lewes. For now I will keep my powder dry and 'give him a squeeze' as they say in the smoke. Just for fun I'm going to give this 20 thumbs down
 
 
On 5 Oct 2015 at 11:52am Linus wrote:
Squeeze me baby
1
 
On 5 Oct 2015 at 12:30pm snoopy wrote:
@Linus It's all about the love x
5
2
On 5 Oct 2015 at 12:36pm Webbo wrote:
@Clifford Yes it is flattering but given the amount of people that read this forum (over 24,000 last month) I wouldn't be surprised if Santon and any other interested parties thought that it was good idea to try to make it seem as though the development is popular.
1
 
On 5 Oct 2015 at 12:58pm Earl of Lewes wrote:
@Snoopy - I recognise one multiple poster, as they make they same unusual grammatical error whatever name they go under. The trolling is a bit boring really, as it's so easy to do on an anonymous forum and once you've played the right-wing nutter/smug DFL joke once, the novelty does tend to wear thin.
2
3
On 8 Oct 2015 at 12:27am little wren wrote:
Affordable housing at 20% below market value. The new houses built in Timberyard Lane start at 625,000 for a one bed. So a one bed at market value will be about 500,000. What planet are you on "Lewes"? Planet of Santon? Much of the land on the North Street development is council owned so why can't they build homes to rent at council house prices. No one is against development at the Phoenix, they are just against ugly development by greedy developers. Lets have something we can all be proud of.
1
 
On 8 Oct 2015 at 10:36am Withit wrote:
Who is saying 20% below market value, I have read the application and there is no mention of what % other than affordable homes 40% of total ptransferred to a regesitered social landlord - is this 80% just another myth put around ? It is worth you reading that section of the application
5
 
On 8 Oct 2015 at 1:28pm lewes wrote:
Little wren. The market values are the market values. How is it possible to rig them so they are low? Would you sell your house for 20% or perhaps 50% under market value in an attempt to help? Remember the development includes social housing, flood defences, new walk way, nursery, dentists and loads more. Which planet are you on where this doesn't make sense? The current use for this land is certainly not living up to its potential and doesn't do us proud, the proposed development addresses this. Looking forward to the planning decision very soon!
1
1
On 8 Oct 2015 at 5:16pm north street neighbour wrote:
Just who is that is to pay for this social housing (very welcome as it might be)? Santon? Hardly. Little LDC? Local authorities' ability to borrow to invest in such housing is horribly constrained. Some larger authorities in London and Birmingham are doing it, but the risks are high and there is little incentive to lower rents to properly affordable levels as a result. To cap it all this government propose that the right to buy is extended to all housing, including that of stand-alone housing associations etc so any affordable homes may be up for sale in due course. Simply demanding 'affordable housing' from LDC is pointless. There was some merit in LPR's suggestion that the development should be much denser to allow for cross-subsidisation of lower rents elsewhere but this time may be past.
 
2
On 9 Oct 2015 at 10:35pm snoopy wrote:
Regarding who will pay for this social housing - maybe ask Lewes Land Trust, The YMCA & whatever private company takes on the Sheltered housing. And yes Santon do have to contribute something.
Truth is no one knows what the true value of the present deal is except Santon & (maybe) Lewes District Council. That is wrong on so many fronts with Transparency being at the forefront. All we are getting is smoke and mirrors.
Keep voting for a full council debate at change.org & well done for those 2,000 people voicing their concerns and support in just 3 weeks!
No it's not too late for anything. If it is wrong it is wrong.

Check it out here »


10 posts left

Your response


You must now log in (or register) to post
Click here to add a link »
Smile
Smile Wink Sad Confused Kiss Favourite Fishing Devil Cool

terms


 

Keere Street Cross 48:132
Keere Street Cross

Ah but if they came on your land the owners would be trespassing. Cats are the worst offenders and seagulls, do they aim at cars? more
QUOTE OF THE MOMENT
I like the way streets have street parties!!!!!!!
JoJo