On 1 Jul 2015 at 5:11pm bastian wrote:
Curious, I know who owned the land, that bank went bankcrupt itself and the land finally belonged to the irish government.
The council did except Santon in with open arms and closed doors to deal with the planning becaus they have outsourced theirs,so we could if you want blame the irish government fro selling to Santon.
On 1 Jul 2015 at 5:16pm Patrick fro ireland wrote:
I except that cuz I'm a nice bloke so I am
On 1 Jul 2015 at 11:25pm plumberinlewes wrote:
I think we need to stop the council having commercial secrets as you guys are making no sense to me.
On 2 Jul 2015 at 7:12am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
I agree. Unfortunately, they're not obliged to disclose any information that is commercially sensitive or relates to the business affairs of a 3rd party.
On 2 Jul 2015 at 9:31am Hmm wrote:
So who ultimately decides what happens to North Street, South Downs National Park Authority?
On 2 Jul 2015 at 9:35am Hmm wrote:
It doesn't sound like the council really works for the people of Lewes, does it? I know central government can tie the hands of councils but this all seems ridiculous and so untransparent. Who makes the ultimate decision on North Street being developed , South Downs Park Authority?
On 2 Jul 2015 at 10:28am in the know2 wrote:
The SDNP can throw the whole thing out if they are not happy with it fitting into the ethos of the National Park Authority. they have stringent guidelines, which if a developer does not adhere to the park can sue them for a great deal of money.
On 2 Jul 2015 at 10:46am sparticus wrote:
The SDPA has responsibility for approving planning on this site. If the proposal fits with in the national and local frame work and the developer has been seen to consult with local interest groups and take some local views on board then SDPA have very little ground to say no.
The SDPA and national development plans are available on line as is Stanton's planning application (deathly dull to read but they are there - theres 1312 documents regarding the current plan).
As far as I can tell the decision, in all reality, has already been made for us by central government. They oblige local authorities via the National Planning Frame work to be pro development. So as long as Stanton full fill all the planning criteria, own the land and have the cash to pay for it then thats largely it, on the whole, by and large, give or take...
On 2 Jul 2015 at 10:47am worried wrote:
I wouldn't hold out too much for the SDNPA making a sound decision for the people of Lewes - look what happened with the Old Magistrates Court site - and having attended some of these planning meetings at Midhurst and seen the conduct of some of the panel (not all) I would be very worried if you care about this town and you want to preserve it's history and quirkiness.
On 2 Jul 2015 at 11:53am Local resident wrote:
"preserve it's history or quirkiness" ... hmm, that might sound like a recipe for "stagnantion" to me....
Lewes as a town/community has evolved, and will continue to evolve, over time - or do we all want to live in a town that tries to remain in the 18/19th/20th Century whslt th rest of the country moves on?
Much of the North Street area is a run-down eyesore to most. Yes, there are some (good) small businesses based there, and there should be some effort directed at making sure they have a fighting chance to survive the redevelopment, but it's a free market economy, and as such businesses will only survive if they evolve and adapt to changes in their circumstances, they cannot assume rents will never change, or remain "cheap" compared to those charged in the surrounding area etc.
The 'Pheonix Quarter redevelopment plans have been known about for some time (even if the fine detail has not), so if those businesses have not had the foresight to look at all possible options, including relocation, or charging higher prices if rents increase, then one would have to question whether they deserve to survive - if any business is relying on use of rented property, then rent increases or loss of site are always a risk, and the business should plan for that in their finacial modelling.
If the local population want to see any of those businesses survive they will, no doubt, be willing to dig deeper into their pockets, and pay higher prices for the goods and services the businesses offer.... however, if the locals are not prepared to do so it will prove that the vociferous minority are not really interested in supporting local businesses, but merely in wanting to pay cheapest possible price for something.
As for the "creative community" who seem to rely on access to "cheap" space, then they too have to accept that, like it or not, if thy want to make a living then they have to charge sufficient for their work/time to cover their costs. If redevelopment means their costs will rise, then they either have to charge more, or they have to relocate to cheaper premsies elsewhere to pursue their art/craft. If their work is worth having then people will pay the increased price, or travel to find it. If not, then perhaps the artists should question whether they should continue, as it seems the market doesn't think their work is worth the cost/travelling. Or, if the artist is truly dedicated to their art, and money is not really the driving force, then they will continue their creative work regardless.
No one is "owed" a living by Lewes, it is up to everyone who wishes to live/work here to find a way of making it work, and to adapt as their circumstances change.
I have lived in Lewes for thirty years, and deeply love the town even though an "outsider" (but not a DFL ;-) ), but I want to see it evolve and thrive, not wither because some locals want to try to preserve it as a living museum piece.
Yes, the town's history and culture must not be lost or buried by commercial greed, but equally, it is the very act of change that will generate the next chapter(s) in Lewes' history...
I agree, affordable housing is a must, to allow locals to stay here rather than be priced out by incoming buyers, espcially now Lewes is seen as "trendy and desirable" location for London money, and local business must be supported by local people. I also agree that new homes should only be built if sufficient extra infrastructure (doctors/schools/shops/roads/parking etc) is/are provided as part of the redevelopment too.
But, equally, no-one has the right to expect their way of life to last forever. People who wish to make a living in Lewes should do their homework, and also plan ahead. If they provide goods or services that are wanted locally, are of the right quality, at the right price, and are available at a convenient location, their businesses will thrive. However, if their business model relies on "sub market" rental costs and/or on convenient location, then their business is clearly not going to survive long term.
Like it or not, Lewes has to evolve. As things stand, the current run-down nature of Pheonix Quarter shows what happens if an area does not evolve...
On 2 Jul 2015 at 12:11pm Hmm wrote:
Hi. I agree with some of the above comments. I grew up in Lewes, and have just returned after thirty years away. I don't want a living museum either, and in fact the town has changed quite a bit in thirty years, losing much of its local agricultural purpose ( cattle market etc.) I am surprised though by the level of gentrification, but I guess that's inevitable as London prices rocket and the population increases. However, to give priority to those with money, property developers, London money, big businesses rather than small, should not in my opinion be given priority, especially by a council. Where is democracy? Silly question I guess considering one in six of the electorate voted Tory and that seems to be ok to decide all of our futures...
On 2 Jul 2015 at 1:20pm Mmh wrote:
I grew up in Uckfield and thank god left it in '69, it's become a Living Latrine LOL . Unlike Arnie I won't be back. I used to use the rail link to Lewes and the free weekend season ticket travel to go to the pells or even to Brighton for a gay old time. And I mean that in the old sense of the word.
On 2 Jul 2015 at 3:35pm Summer of '69 wrote:
Mmh what are you on about, no one mentioned Uckfield & what does 'it's become a Living Latrine LOL' actually mean?
You'll find many younger ex Lewes residents living in Uckfield, forced out by high property prices but that's life & many 'new' uckfield residents actually think it's a great little town. Hey we even have a cinema, good mix of shops & a conveniently positioned post office!
It certainly doesn't have the history or charm of Lewes but it is a lovely town to live in with good infrastructure & fine schools. It also has far fewer issues than Lewes with anti-social behaviour.......and it doesn't have YOU, which judging by your remarks is another big plus point!
On 2 Jul 2015 at 3:39pm Hmm wrote:
And it has a bus station! ;-)
On 2 Jul 2015 at 4:35pm bastian wrote:
The problem for the ntaional park is that if they let this huge development through untouched, the other National Parks will be expected to do the same. They can either stand up for the principals of the Park system, or be part of the destruction of what that stands for.
On 2 Jul 2015 at 4:48pm Mmh wrote:
Hey I was in that cinema when the front seats were 1/6 and it was one screen and you could have a smoke in there. I saw Manor Park thrown up on R.Neville's land and the the DFC's living there moan about the squaddies. I was there when the Maiden's Head was posh and me old dad used the tap room. Good infrastructure LOL one street through the lot and that was as choked before the bypass as it is now. No school finer than the Parochial school in Belmont Lane, the Victorian one not the one further down. Not much you can tell me about Uckfield,and you'll be pleased to know that I won't even go through the place in a hearse when my time comes, I got me plot in Snatts Road bought and in my will I'll instruct them to go to the N. end of the bypass and back in. Hey, glad you like it there, it's gotta be better than Croydon, are you a DFC. LO*******L