[Sussex] monks farm planning

[Thunder Bolt]

94% of the UK is non-urban.

https://fullfact.org/economy/has-92-country-not-been-built/

This plan also includes 24 hectares of country park (the size of Buckingham Park)

 

[Eggmundo]

What is the time frame on when works are likely to start?

Well the IKEA should be up by the end of the week.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Well the IKEA should be up by the end of the week.

With a few bits left over

 

[LamieRobertson]

It’s just awful isn’t it. How did this get through!?

Permission was given to build a hotel which was never going t happen...shortly afterwards they started on the flats..as a side issue have any sold? Its incomplete and its so far taken 2 years?

 

[Dave the OAP]

With a few bits left over

....a set of screws, a piece of facial wood, some dowels and Allen key.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Look at the Brighton Road development in Shoreham. Sorry but it’s just wrong. I do get your point but there has to be middle ground. Just look at it.

they're looking rather good.

 

[beorhthelm]

Look at the Brighton Road development in Shoreham. Sorry but it’s just wrong. I do get your point but there has to be middle ground. Just look at it.

is that realy what you're offended by? should see what they done east side of Battersea power station. you're complaining about 540 homes in a riverside development, presumably replacing derelict land? as before, if not here, where?

 

[Weststander]

Migration is in the thousands not millions. It also includes foreign students who go back home after completing their studies.

https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/


Population increases have far more to do with better health, lower infant mortality and people living longer.
Tell the doctors to allow us to smoke, drink and laze around more.

You're wrong I'm afraid. Net migration over the last 21 years has been in the hundreds of thousands per year, x 21 years.

The undisputed facts are that there are currently 3.9 million citizens from other EU countries living in the UK, with 0.9 millions Brits living elsewhere in the EU. With millions of non-EU citizens. Sources: ONS, Fullfacts, BBC.




No one disputes the numbers, just whether it's beneficial or detrimental.

Why would you want to deny the facts?

 

[perseus]

if not Lancing or Shoreham, if no high rises, where do you suggest we house people?

London. The high rises are only attractive to Londoners and then only because they have a parking space.

 

[perseus]

The original feeling locally was one of rampant NIMBYism - traffic, flooding, undesirables due to affordable housing etc. Then the legal arguments were made that - in line with the Local Plan - this site was earmarked for housing. Then IKEA came on board, and traffic, low-paid, unskilled jobs attracting the wrong sort of people was put about.

Then cyclists, who would prefer to keep the psychotically dangerous Sussex Pad junction, started howling. Then people with nothing to do with the airport started whining about airspace and helicopter training.

The developers have mitigated every single concern. The traffic flow will be improved, cyclists have a new route to cross the A27 (even though the opponents lied about that), the flooding issues will be dealt with and maintained, IKEA pay the Living Wage (rather than the government's 'Living Wage'), and offer training and opportunities.

There is also the contradictory argument put about that the developers - Brighton & Hove Albion - are nothing more than greedy charlatans, with the same opponents making the counter-argument that the project is not financially viable.

Last night, pretty much every argument against the scheme was a lesson in life-raft clinging. If they had genuine concerns about the site that were not mitigated, they did not raise them. Instead - and I use the chair of Lancing Parish Council as being the worst - they used hysteria ("I live in South Lancing, and I am scared - literally scared stiff - of this development"), fanciful claims which were not tested, and a sense of being disingenuous to the point of lying ("I represent all of Lancing...") in their opposition.

One of the councillors who voted against it did so on the principle that 'a better application might come along...', as if that was a reason on its own to refuse permission (it isn't).

My take is that I am not a rampant supporter of the project, though new housing is very much needed, but I never heard or saw a good enough argument to object to it either.

NO opportunity to suggest improvements to the scheme because of the NIMBYs.

 

[perseus]

is that realy what you're offended by? should see what they done east side of Battersea power station. you're complaining about 540 homes in a riverside development, presumably replacing derelict land? as before, if not here, where?

The Port have blighted the land discouraging new businesses from setting up. They tried to make the land derelict. All they did was make firms go somewhere else. Businesses like land with good transport links, and new shipping businesses wanted to use the wharves. Still do.

 

[Stat Brother]

Wow, it’s amazing how ignorant someone can be when discussing a topic that doesn’t affect them. How many people can pick and choose when they start work? How many ‘school runs’ happen between 5-6pm? How many buses have you seen on the A27?

The one thing this thread, the Valley Gardens thread, and any other transportation thread has in common, is selfish posts like yours:-

'How does this effect me in my car? Badly'.

Therefore it's bad, the whole thing is bad unless we build more roads.


The point I was making is:-

How many people actually NEED to be on the road at that time.
I'm sure the answer would be a disproportionally small number.

The problem comes when that's followed up by 'well what are my other options?'

The answer isn't more roads, the answer is better transportation.

It would seem thinking holistically is somewhat troublesome for many who are stuck in their boxes.


Just out of curiosity how have you come to the conclusion of my ignorance on this subject, and how do you know I am unaffected by it?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I’m surprised a lot more fuss isn’t made about how cheap and shit looking new developments are.

 

[Weststander]

I’m surprised a lot more fuss isn’t made about how cheap and shit looking new developments are.

They usually are. Churned out by developers to blueprints.

But young people and struggling families are elated to simply get a new home.

A genuine question as I don't know; are new developments of housing in Germany for the working classes more attractive? (I've only seen the beautiful new houses in Austria and Germany for the well off).

 

[Stat Brother]

I’m surprised a lot more fuss isn’t made about how cheap and shit looking new developments are.

Ha, funny you should say that.

Yesterday I rode past the one being built in Littlehampton, behind Wick FC.
The first 4 detached houses, completed, are identical and look exactly like a 4 year olds drawing of a house.

Grand Designs they most definitely aren't.

 

[PoG]

The answer isn't more roads, the answer is better transportation.

How do you suggest we get better transport?

 

[Uter]

The one thing this thread, the Valley Gardens thread, and any other transportation thread has in common, is selfish posts like yours:-

'How does this effect me in my car? Badly'.

Therefore it's bad, the whole thing is bad unless we build more roads.


The point I was making is:-

How many people actually NEED to be on the road at that time.
I'm sure the answer would be a disproportionally small number.

The problem comes when that's followed up by 'well what are my other options?'

The answer isn't more roads, the answer is better transportation.

It would seem thinking holistically is somewhat troublesome for many who are stuck in their boxes.


Just out of curiosity how have you come to the conclusion of my ignorance on this subject, and how do you know I am unaffected by it?

I admire your unwavering commitment to the idea that a transport policy that prioritises the least efficient mode of transport might not be the most sensible solution in urban areas. You are up against some pretty entrenched opinions from people who cannot see it the same way as you. I gave up after being on the receiving end of a visceral and rather incoherent rant for expressing what I thought was a pretty innocuous opinion about an efficient mode of transport possibly not being used to its full potential at the Amex.

 

[Stat Brother]

How do you suggest we get better transport?

Invest in trains, buses and infrastructure, have a proper joined up affordable safe public transport system that is better quicker and more reliable than 1 person in 1 car.
It can be done with the money you want to spend on a new road, but it won't be done overnight, and sadly it won't be done over the course of a 5 year parliament, which is why we're in a pattern of patch and repair which is screwing everybody over.

 

[Arthur]

Doesn't really affect me as I don't live in that part of the world and I very rarely have any reason to be down there but the few times I have its pretty much always been a nightmare post Shoreham until you get the other side of Worthing so I can understand why the locals aren't overly pleased about it.

I did pop down to watch a pre season friendly at Lancing this year and it seemed to me every property had at least one board outside. They were either Lacing bypass now, No to Ikea or For Sale and some had all 3 which again paints its own picture.

Going to Ikea is about as appealing as a kick in the balls but if it makes Mr Bloom a few quid then good luck to him.

 

[blue-shifted]

It’s difficult to see how alternative transport can alleviate the traffic in this area.

There’s already a regular coastline train service serving all the towns along the Sussex coast. There’s a coastline bus service.

It’s never going to be a popular cycling route (hills, fast traffic, long distances).

The problem is most journeys between towns don’t start or stop near enough a public transport route to make using public transport quick or easy. If you live and work in the same town, you can probably get by without a car. If not and you don’t work or live near a station (and living near a station, you’ll pay a huge premium for) it’s difficult to get by without one. The distances along the sussex coast are too great for cycling and the time taken by public transport is prohibitive.