New Town planned for Sussex

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Oh how short your memory is. I suppose the Amex floats on air does it ?

This country's population is growing, there's no houses, jobs etc etc to go round. Yes ok, we can stop the immigration etc etc but to say a chunk of the Sussex countryside will be bulldozed is quite hypocritical. Only around 7% of this country has been built on...we need more houses.

Don't believe everything the developers and the Government tell you. There's enough houses, just in the wrong places, and it is more expensive for them to be redeveloped rather than new build.

Major investment is needed in huge areas of the north, but it ain't going to happen. Remember that the NHA are huge contributors to the Tory Party.

 

[repomanse25]

More potential news fans...

What if its filled by Londoners like Brighton ?

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

The property developers make a bigger profit building houses in the South than in the North. The land might cost a bit more to acquire but a 2 bed house will sell at £275k whereas up north it will only realise £100K

Exactly

 

[Stat Brother]

All building on that site will do, is provide 'nice' houses for people priced out of London, and social housing for people 'struggling' to live in London.

Either way it will do very little for Sussex families, and will just continue feeding the London property bubble.

 

[repomanse25]

All building on that site will do, is provide 'nice' houses for people priced out of London, and social housing for people 'struggling' to live in London.

Either way it will do very little for Sussex families, and will just continue feeding the London property bubble.

Spot on

 

[Golden Oldie]

This isn't the first time the idea of a new town between Sayers Common and Henfield has been mooted, and it must be a very slow news day if the Argus have only just picked up on it.
The people behind it were just stirring it the last time, seeing what the reaction might be, and I doubt if it is any different his time round.
New builds in Mid Sussex aren't selling that well at the moment, there are already plans for 4000 houses approved in the area but yet to be built, so how does anyone imagine that they could sell another 10000? And who has the funding available for such large scale development in the current climate? I can't see any such plans coming to fruition in the foreseeable future.

 

[The Birdman]

Just had a thought if it goes ahead could they build a new cricket ground for Sussex which could take full international cricket !

 

[beorhthelm]

Don't believe everything the developers and the Government tell you. There's enough houses, just in the wrong places, and it is more expensive for them to be redeveloped rather than new build.

said for the third time i think. its not just a matter of cost, and it may be cheaper to redevelop brown field sites. the main obstacle is still planning system, even for brownfield sites its onerus and subject to objections. couple caes im aware of, one where the regency society objects to any redevelopment of a terrace of semi-derelict houses to protect some ornate effing ceiling roses and the other i dont recall the reason but plot cant get planning and so has been left as a car park for 20years. Southbank Uni took a decade to redevelop a site becuase of objections, which came from residents in a housing association block built on ex-uni land intended to be the "enabling" part of the development. its barmy and needs a radical solution.

 

[clapham_gull]

What if its filled by Londoners like Brighton ?

Exactly, and while we're at it would those originally from Sussex please bugger off out of London too.

 

[Comedy Steve]

So, yes, owners could be reporting occupied homes as empty - wonder if the councils do any checking.

I was told they had the ability to check utility bills, but the surefire way was when refuse & recycling collections report the property as having regular rubbish put out! I know this from when I moved into a new build in Henfield back in 2008 - no correspondence from the council until I put a bin out, then a week later, woosh, a doormat full of post. Though that could have been a coincedence.

 

[Brovion]

All those complaining about this are probably also complaining about the price of property in Brighton. One way to help affordability is a big increase in the supply of houses.

However, the Mayfields site as shown is nowhere near Burgess Hill station. The nearest station is at Hassocks but it's not close enough to walk to. This is a major consideration for sustainability. I'm not against a new town but it needs to be in the right place.

PG

Spot on. Given the ever-increasing population we obviously need new towns, but the creaking infrastructure of Sussex is really struggling to cope with the ones we've got. Expansion of existing town(s) would be better than dumping a load of houses in an area only served by a couple of glorified cart tracks. The roads in general desperately need sorting out to increase capacity as do the railways. (To say nothing about providing utilities, facilities and jobs for the expanding population).

 

[Brovion]

said for the third time i think. its not just a matter of cost, and it may be cheaper to redevelop brown field sites. the main obstacle is still planning system, even for brownfield sites its onerus and subject to objections. couple caes im aware of, one where the regency society objects to any redevelopment of a terrace of semi-derelict houses to protect some ornate effing ceiling roses and the other i dont recall the reason but plot cant get planning and so has been left as a car park for 20years. Southbank Uni took a decade to redevelop a site becuase of objections, which came from residents in a housing association block built on ex-uni land intended to be the "enabling" part of the development. its barmy and needs a radical solution.

Another good point. Development in the country tends to be only opposed by an unholy alliance of country-dwelling Tories who don't want the riff-raff (or their roads) in their area and blinkered environmentalists who can't be pragmatic. Build in a town and you've got thousands of potential objectors! The dead hand of the Regency Society is a good example.

 

[The Birdman]

Crawley FC. Could do a Wimbledon and move to the new town as they need a better stadium.

 

[The Birdman]

What about the Water supply even though its being proposed to build on a the water table.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

But we really need to be developing brownfield sites: the old Preston Barracks down the road from me has been lying idle for more than a decade - why is that not being used?

It is being used. I work there. Brighton needs low-tech employment sites, just as much as it needs sites for housing.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

Yes, it's possible to buy a bike and then cycle 7 miles every day to a station then pay £400/month for a season ticket to London and live in an isolated village 10 miles away from the nearest city.

The simple fact is, this is NOT what the so-called yuppies want. They live in flats in cities, not villages 2 hours away from their place of work. And I very much doubt a load of rural houses in the downs will be affordable.


It is targeting the older generation market, not affordable and practical accommodation.

I'm not suggesting they'll all be working in London, far more likely they'd be commuting to Brighton, Worthing, Littlehampton, Burgess Hill, Haywards Heath, Crawley, Gatwick or Horsham. And it's at worst a 2 mile ride from Mayfields to Hassocks station each way, which would only be around 15 minutes even for the fairly unfit amongst us.

It's no worse than someone living in Ditchling. If you've ever been to Hassocks station on a weekday you'll know that car parks are full to bursting, to the point where the Parish Council are desperately trying to find addition car parking spaces. They know that, however you view it, extra passengers at Hassocks bring in extra business to the Village, even if it's just people stopping off at the Hassocks Hotel.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

Don't believe everything the developers and the Government tell you. There's enough houses, just in the wrong places, and it is more expensive for them to be redeveloped rather than new build.

Major investment is needed in huge areas of the north, but it ain't going to happen. Remember that the NHA are huge contributors to the Tory Party.

So why has this Government dismantled all the regional development agencies then?

It has been Tory policy to divest itself of social housing ever since the 'Right to Buy' policy of Mrs. Thatcher, and promote Private sector ownership, either as owner occupiers, private landlord, or Housing Associations. That's not going to change with this administration.

Irelands 'tiger' economy was ruined as a consequence of unregulated and unsupervised property developments going sour. Regulation is one area where Government has an absolute obligation, it cannot be left to an unregulated free market to dictate national policy.

 

[The Large One]

If - IF - a new town needs to be built (and I've yet to hear a slam-dunk compelling case), and sustainable transport is a key issue, I'd suggest land nearer to Balcombe Station.

 

[The Large One]

I'm not suggesting they'll all be working in London, far more likely they'd be commuting to Brighton, Worthing, Littlehampton, Burgess Hill, Haywards Heath, Crawley, Gatwick or Horsham. And it's at worst a 2 mile ride from Mayfields to Hassocks station each way, which would only be around 15 minutes even for the fairly unfit amongst us.

It's no worse than someone living in Ditchling. If you've ever been to Hassocks station on a weekday you'll know that car parks are full to bursting, to the point where the Parish Council are desperately trying to find addition car parking spaces. They know that, however you view it, extra passengers at Hassocks bring in extra business to the Village, even if it's just people stopping off at the Hassocks Hotel.

It's 2.5 miles from A23 to Hassocks Station.
It's 4.5 miles from a nominal mid-point to Hassocks Station.
Its 7 miles from Henfield to Hassocks Station.

It's 1.5 miles from Ditchling to Hassoscks Station.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

I'm not suggesting they'll all be working in London, far more likely they'd be commuting to Brighton, Worthing, Littlehampton, Burgess Hill, Haywards Heath, Crawley, Gatwick or Horsham. And it's at worst a 2 mile ride from Mayfields to Hassocks station each way, which would only be around 15 minutes even for the fairly unfit amongst us.

It's no worse than someone living in Ditchling. If you've ever been to Hassocks station on a weekday you'll know that car parks are full to bursting, to the point where the Parish Council are desperately trying to find addition car parking spaces. They know that, however you view it, extra passengers at Hassocks bring in extra business to the Village, even if it's just people stopping off at the Hassocks Hotel.

You're miles out. It won't be two miles from Mayfield to Hassocks Station. It's over two miles from parts of Hurstpierpoint to Hassocks Station. Blackstone village is not far from the centre of the proposed development and that's well over six miles from Hassocks Station. If you'd be prepared to cycle about 13 miles a day to and from a station then good luck but it sounds a bit like Lewes DC's suggestion that fans would walk from Brighton Station to Sheepcote Valley. Most outlying users of Hassocks Station drive there.

I doubt if rail passengers dfrom the west will bring much extra business to Hassocks village, which is to the east of the railway line. What they will do is clog up the narrow, crowded and occasionally single-lane Hurstpierpoint High Street. People from the west already allow an extra ten minutes in case of spectacular jams in Hurst.