Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think


Lewes Forum New message

Santon advertising feature p122 in Oct Viva lewes

6
10
On 24 Sep 2015 at 12:52pm Robert wrote:
Has anyone seen Santon's feature/advertisement in Viva Lewes page 122? They are offering to temporary rehouse businesses on the Phoenix state before work begins on the building of 416 luxury 'unaffordable' houses. People on the Phoenix estate are already having to move out now! Isn't this talk a bit premature, are we not waiting for the South Down National parks decision regarding the suitability of this development in Lewes?
21
10
On 24 Sep 2015 at 2:08pm lewes wrote:
Sounds like it's in the bag and thank god as it makes sense to redevelop this large piece of wasteland and house thousands of people that need homes. I am also looking forward to the new bridge that will connect malling back up to the rest of the town, a riverside walkway, a kids nursery and another doctors and dentist surgery along with cafes and bars and other retail not to mention being able to launch a kayak from the new riverside area. Just what lewes is crying out for! Apparently they will be enlarging the skate park by tesco as well so not a bad plan all in all!
11
13
On 24 Sep 2015 at 3:45pm Clifford wrote:
Flood plain. Santon will be well and gone and pocketed the profits when the trouble starts. 'Why didn't anyone say? We didn't realise.'
19
8
On 24 Sep 2015 at 3:52pm The Twister wrote:
Typical negative reactionary attitude Robert. My understanding is that at least 40% are what is classified as "affordable housing", as well as housing for other designated groups. What right do the squatters on this land have to deny those people that housing.Is it because they have chosen an "alternative" lifestyle and they have supernatural artistic talents that are beyond most of us untalented "normal" plebs?
16
6
On 24 Sep 2015 at 4:49pm lewes wrote:
Santon will also be adding flood defences and the new houses will be built one story above the current site and the same level as all the properties that were not flooded last time so pretty good planning really!
9
4
On 24 Sep 2015 at 4:54pm Don't get wet wrote:
The current site occupiers should be careful as that site completely flooded last time and the big winter river tides are on their way especially if they are sleeping there in vehicles. I mean if it flooded at night it could be seriously dangerous.
8
15
On 24 Sep 2015 at 11:33pm DOwn From Londinium wrote:
Santon are in it for one thing. Profit. They will rape and pillage Lewes and then run away with their tidy profit, leaving cheap, badly made, plastic clones (checkout maiden bower for a vision) the only people who can afford it will be Jonty, Marmaduke and their pig shagging chums from the smoke, the are polluting our individuality with their willingness for uniformity and order, like a nice mediocre hair cut. I shall stand at the edge and laugh my butt off when they all get flooded.
8
4
On 25 Sep 2015 at 6:54am Robert wrote:
The current Santon scheme being considered by the South Downs National Park will offer a limited number of houses that will be 20% less than the market rate, so completely unaffordable by people working in and around Lewes. Look at the prices up the river at Chandlers Wharf 'PRICES START FROM 695,000 UP TO 1,600,000' What's 20% off these, anyone got a calculator? Get ready for the London invasion!
1
4
On 25 Sep 2015 at 6:59am A ton a week wrote:
plus council tax is what a 3 bed council house costs in parts of Wealden. The few that are left, that is affordable.
8
6
On 25 Sep 2015 at 7:29am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Loads of votes for the pro-Santon posts. Either there's been something of a sea-change in people's attitudes or Santon's PR company monitor this forum.
Anyway, "affordable" housing does nothing for those in greatest need and the main beneficiary will still be the developer. What is needed is social housing, but LDC seem very reluctant to try and get developers to build any.
If they were going to build social housing down there, I'd feel differently about the development, but this will just hasten the transformation of Lewes a ghetto for the affluent.
19
11
On 25 Sep 2015 at 8:13am Southstreeter wrote:
@ACT There are a lot thumbs ups for the pro Santon posts ...because a lot of people want the development to go ahead as soon as possible . It's a lame proposition to think that anyone will build council houses ( that's the old fashioned name for affordable housing in case any young people are reading this ) on the phoenix estate or anywhere for that matter ! . I agree entirely that there needs to be a huge amount of social housing built in the uk , I have 3 children of my own who are of house buying age but are unlikely to be able evet to afford to . However the need for affordable housing and the Santon / Phoenix development are separate issues . That is a development of area improvement and housing supply in an area now that needs desperate attention with a nod to affordability. The other issue of local / affordable / social housing is one we should all address with our local councils not a private company . It is not a God given right to be able to live in a cheap house in a town of your choice sadly . The is a tendency on this forum to appear to hate anyone who can afford to buy an expensive house , maybe those people have striven and worked hard to be able to . It smacks of jealousy to me .
8
6
On 25 Sep 2015 at 9:34am The Twister wrote:
Southstreeter,
You managed to eloquently express my thoughts almost exactly. Let's not forget we are living under an elected Tory government that has made no secret of the fact that it has no commitment to the provision of social housing for this generation or the next. As you rightly say "council" housing is now practically an archaic term. I don't agree with the Government's stance on housing by the way but some people on here need a reality check.
11
4
On 25 Sep 2015 at 9:48am huw wrote:
Social housing, some affordable housing and some houses that the developers can make a profit from (as why else would they get involved in a project).
Doctor's surgery, nursery & some small independent shops (oh for a covered market).
Business space at affordable rates for those established there already (these would probably be subject to gradual increase to rise to nearer parity with the rest of town).
Community spaces (theatre/music/etc)
Start up business/creative spaces at discounted rates but with only short term (say 2 year) lease so that people can get their projects under way then when it is viable (or not) move on to allow someone else to benefit from this opportunity.
Flood defenses.
Green space.
Sensible access and parking (possibly a multi storey).
I think that about sums up what I feel is needed and I'm not sure either current plan fulfills that.
Santon is in it for the money and I wouldn't trust them not to renege on promises and the Phoenix want the continued use of their space at discount (although I'm happy to be corrected if wrong).
There are selfish aspects to both plans but personally I don't want to lose the business based down there and have them replaced by poorly built homes that will be bought to rent out forcing local people to move away.
Although I don't really use them, the creative aspects down there have helped keep the town from becoming an anodyne, clone copy and it would be a shame to lose that completely.
11
7
On 25 Sep 2015 at 11:09am Lewes wrote:
Annette curtain twitcher. There has not been a sea of change but the majority that want the development to go ahead don't always turn out at the town hall events however the people against things which are mainly older people and the current occupants of the site and their friends from surrounding areas appear to be larger in numbers. Just because we agree we must be santon pr where in fact we live right next to the site and love lewes to bits but it has to move with the times!
4
2
On 25 Sep 2015 at 1:23pm Multi Storey Car Park ? wrote:
Flippin' ' eck huw. Never Never Never. Archaic or not and call it what you like, 100 a week house rent is affordable. BUT no one should expect to live in a town of choice/birth. I was born in Lewes and grew up in Uckfield because the council had built an estate there. It was brilliant living there, then came Manor Park and the rot set in.Yes all that time ago it started going downhill.
8
6
On 25 Sep 2015 at 1:48pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Southstreeter, social housing and housing development need not be separate issues. It is perfectly acceptable for planning conditions to be imposed that require developers to build a certain number of units for social housing when they are granted the licence to print money that is a planning consent in the south east.
It would pay for itself in the long run by savings in the housing benefit budget too. So-called "affordable" housing is still beyond the means of a family on an average income.
10
9
On 25 Sep 2015 at 3:22pm Bod wrote:
Agree with ACT and Huw. I guarantee that most residents of Lewes are not in favour or LDCs behaviour or Santon. It's all about the money. Not money that benefits Lewes, just developers, estate agents, and a council that doesn't give a t*ss about what most of us value in this town. The claim about added benefits is laughable, where have they been from recent developments? Nope, we have a rotten council selling off publicly owned land to greedy property developers, not to mention the absurdity of trying to build on a flod plain ( some people have very short memories ). Plus we have council plans to build on greenfield sites. We should stop paying council tax until this council does what it's paid to do, by us, not property developers!
4
3
On 25 Sep 2015 at 3:49pm trooper wrote:
I seem to remember it being posted on the Forum some time ago that decisions taken by the Council were mainly taken by NON Lewes Councillors ,if this is so, these Councillors are not going to be interested in any objections from the citizens of Lewes, or even much care about the town, they do not live here.
10
2
On 25 Sep 2015 at 3:56pm Lewes Resident wrote:
"So-called "affordable" housing is still beyond the means of a family on an average income." ACT - In Lewes, yes that may be the case, but elsewhere in UK it is definitely not.
For example, older three bed terraced/semi-detached with garden and garages can be purchased or only 160 - 180K just off the M4 about 2.5 hours away from Lewes, and brand new three bed semis with garages can be purchased for similar sums only 20-30mins drive outside central Newcastle. Okay, they may not be in such a "picturesque" or desirable area as the Sussex Downs, but they are definitely more "affordable" to people on lower/average incomes than the over-inflated prices in Lewes.
So, affordability is as much down to where you live as anything else. As others have said, no-one has a God-given right to be able to buy/rent in the town/vllage in which they were born/grew up. Many youngsters may wish to stay in thir hom town, but unfortunately life doesn't always work that way.
That said, I agree that much of Lewes is fast becoming (or has already become) a remote suburb of London, where many "residents" choose to live here evenings and weekends, but have no real wish to adapt to life in a rural county town. Given the unwillingness of many DFL's to embrace and accept Lewes as it is (was?), I cannot help but wonder why they ever move(d) here, given they then have to endure two hours plus a day commuting to the big smoke... maybe th novlty will wear off, they'll all move on to the next "on trend" town, and Lewes' prices and rents will fall back to a more affordable level.
As others have said, Pheonix has to be redeveloped, or it will continue to be the semi-derelict eyesore it is at present. It is naiive to expect developers to redevelop it for little profit/out of the goodness of their hearts - they have a duty/wish to provide profit for their share holders.
Yes, a proportion of the redevelopment should be restricted to "more affordable" housing, but we all have to accept that even at say 35% below market rate, then few on low incomes would find rents/purchases "affordable".
As for the "fringe" businesses that currently operate out of Pheonix due to the sub-market rents/costs of workshops etc - ultimately, if they cannot operate the same business and pay the going commercial rate for the floor space they wish to occupy, then they have to accept they do not have a business which is viable here in Lewes. N.B. That does not mean their business cannot work elsewhere where costs are lower, simply that it cannot work paying Lewes rent/rates etc. Now, if the redevelopers find the start-up units fall empty, then that will force them to lower the rents etc, at which point current Pheonix-type enterprises may be able to afford to use them once more. But, if businesses can be found to occupy the new units, pay the "going rate", and survive, then many would say those businesses are perhaps more deserving of the spaces available?
Life is tough sometimes, and was probably always so for youngsters compared to their parents generation(s)? Perhaps if more youngsters understood that studying hard, and/or taking apprenticeships, and working hard etc open more doors to better employment prospects and (hopefully) higher incomes, then maybe fewer of them would believe society "owes" them a comfortable lifestyle in the town of their choice.
I fear that the "work ethic" of older generations has often been overtaken by the "do as little as you can" ethic for many youngsters, which is fine, so long as those that adopt the latter understand it will have consequences for them.
The influx of London money has done Lewes no favours, but that is not the fault of Stanton.
Perhaps Lewes residents should not have made/kept the place so attractive as to be seen to be worth the hassle of a 75min each way daily commute...
7
2
On 25 Sep 2015 at 5:56pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Any town needs low-cost housing for those people who need to live locally and do low-wage, but essential, jobs. Where are the bar staff, carers, teaching assistants and so on going to live when all the housing is only affordable for those on big fat salaries?
5
1
On 25 Sep 2015 at 6:28pm Bod wrote:
Also, because I this generation the cost of a house in relation to salary is proportionally much greater than it was for previous generations, even those on a good average salary struggle. London buyers have the effect of inflating house prices here even further as they have more to spend if they have owned property in London. It's a knock-on-effect. So we need affordable housing. It's not a solution to go and live somewhere where house prices are more affordable but there may not be any jobs, or ones that can give a reasonable salary to afford the cheaper properties.
4
4
On 25 Sep 2015 at 6:33pm Bod wrote:
Ps: not anti-Londoners, just think we need diversity of housing and not all these luxury apartments or houses which are unaffordable to a lot of people.
6
4
On 25 Sep 2015 at 10:30pm Mavis wrote:
The rabble down north street have woken up !
5
1
On 26 Sep 2015 at 2:37am Local wrote:
I've asked before. Why didn't some of the crustie-friendly folk buy the NTQ site from NAMA before Santon did, so that they could keep it as an eyesore full of old vans?
5
1
On 26 Sep 2015 at 8:14am Southstreeter wrote:
@local I suspect they could have bought it as they're probably all trustafarians managing to get by as artists thanks to top ups from mummy and daddy who wouldn't have minded chipping in a bit more for an actual property purchase. However I suspect that everyone down there thought they'd get away without having to and it's only now , when the writings on the wall that they're all panicking .
Also bear in mind that at least two of the larger units down there are rented from Santon by individuals ( one a very prominent local business man ) who are subletting to the arty folk and making profits in a true capitalistic fashion ( ooh yes just like Santon )
4
3
On 26 Sep 2015 at 10:30am Border Control wrote:
@southstreeter You say artists, i say history will be the judge of that !
8
1
On 26 Sep 2015 at 3:16pm north street neighbour wrote:
Southstreeter is absolutely right - it is naive to expect Santon Plc or even LDC (who have a fiduciary duty to local residents) to subsidise large amounts of social housing. Especially when right to buy legislation will mean it will be up for sale in a few years. They cannot be responsible for decades of failed housing policy in the UK. On that point the name of Tim Renton (Margaret Thatcher's Chief Whip) amongst those opposing the plans raised a wry smile. He and his colleagues were responsible for the 1980 Housing Act (Right to Buy) and the 1988 Housing Act (removal of security of tenure/rent control). Priceless irony.
3
3
On 26 Sep 2015 at 5:22pm Bod wrote:
Buy-to-let is another reason house prices and rents are so inflated. Property has always been used as investment, but surely not to the degree it is now. I wonder what the proportion of Lewes's new developments are second homes, or even just part of someone's portfolio of multiple properties.
2
2
On 26 Sep 2015 at 5:22pm Bod wrote:
Buy-to-let is another reason house prices and rents are so inflated. Property has always been used as investment, but surely not to the degree it is now. I wonder what the proportion of Lewes's new developments are second homes, or even just part of someone's portfolio of multiple properties.
5
3
On 26 Sep 2015 at 5:39pm affordable wrote:
So say if houses were offered by santon at just 50% of market value what would happen is people would simply buy them then sell them on for full market value so would not make any difference whatsoever.


7 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


 

Torchlit 126:132
Torchlit

Well it looks as if I can jet off soon , none of the loud mouths with nothing behind them have anything to say, all piss and wind... more
QUOTE OF THE MOMENT
If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.
George Washington