The Lewes Groups is concerned about one abuse already being operated in the house building business, and a second being lined up for the future through the Right Homes in the Right Places proposals recently consulted on.

Letter published Sussex Express
Thursday 5 January

If Kevin Froude thinks that granting planning permission for new housing at Mitchelswood Farm, Newick, will help solve the housing crisis then he is the one being naive. He certainly hasn’t understood this year’s Civitas and House of Lords reports, which show beyond all doubt that all it will achieve is to shift new housebuilding from sustainable urban brownfield locations, like Newhaven Marina or South Downs Avenue, Lewes, to the car-dependent rural greenfield sites in villages like Newick that house builders find more profitable.

The reports show that the recent increase in planning permissions has not been translated into extra housing. Instead developer land banks have grown.

So have the major house builders’ profits, as they focus on their most profitable sites. Their business model depends on steadily rising prices.

They will never choose to build enough houses to reduce prices, because it isn’t in their commercial interest. If we want more housing, then we need a new delivery model.

John Kay, CPRE Sussex
Rushey Green, Ringmer

Letter: Proposed housing makes "undeliverable promises" about housing "Lewes people".

Dear Sir

Ronald Moore is entitled to promote new housing on his land on the western edge of Lewes through your columns (Letters 14 October) but he should not use a disingenuous prospectus.

The government’s new Housing Bill is “bully boy tactics which will not solve the housing crisis”, says CPRE Sussex.

This week the Housing and Planning Bill reached its second reading in Parliament, promising to “simplify and speed up” the planning process.  

Some years ago Lewes District Council embarked on a Regeneration Strategy, to identify superfluous council-owned sites that might be put to good alternative uses, such as the provision of affordable housing, or sold to realise assets. That seems an entirely sensible project. The council decided to seek a commercial partner to help it realise maximum value; again an entirely sensible precaution if the council itself lacked the necessary expertise.

As the project progressed, some concerns began to be raised. The principal issue was that, on the grounds of commercial confidentiality, the council refused to share with its residents, or even with its town and parish councils, which of the sites it owned were being considered for inclusion in its list of superfluous assets. The news did leak out that there were 49 of them, and there were strong rumours, not denied by the council, that the list included sites that were in current use in such roles as community centres, car parks and playing fields. The council steadfastly refused to explain or justify its plans and claimed exemption from FOI requests.

Some years ago Lewes District Council embarked on a Regeneration Strategy, to identify superfluous council-owned sites that might be put to good alternative uses, such as the provision of affordable housing, or sold to realise assets. That seems an entirely sensible project. The council decided to seek a commercial partner to help it realise maximum value; again an entirely sensible precaution if the council itself lacked the necessary expertise.

As the project progressed, some concerns began to be raised. The principal issue was that, on the grounds of commercial confidentiality, the council refused to share with its residents, or even with its town and parish councils, which of the sites it owned were being considered for inclusion in its list of superfluous assets. The news did leak out that there were 49 of them, and there were strong rumours, not denied by the council, that the list included sites that were in current use in such roles as community centres, car parks and playing fields. The council steadfastly refused to explain or justify its plans and claimed exemption from FOI requests.

This has been a challenging year in Lewes.

The District's claim to a 5-year housing supply was lost at an appeal early in 2014. This led to a number of applications for development of rural greenfield sites in the Low Weald villages being rushed forward. These were taking advantage of the consequent presumption in favour of sustainable development and offering only the low, historic, level of affordable housing required by the old 2003 Local Plan rather than the 40% shown to be viable for such sites and included in the new Local Plan.

This has been a challenging year in Lewes.

The District's claim to a 5-year housing supply was lost at an appeal early in 2014. This led to a number of applications for development of rural greenfield sites in the Low Weald villages being rushed forward. These were taking advantage of the consequent presumption in favour of sustainable development and offering only the low, historic, level of affordable housing required by the old 2003 Local Plan rather than the 40% shown to be viable for such sites and included in the new Local Plan.

Lewes District does not currently have an adopted Core Strategy, so will be vulnerable to development applications after the end of this month. One such greenfield application (in Wivelsfield parish, on the edge of Haywards Heath) was listed this week; another (Ringmer parish) appears to be imminent.