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 Annual General Meeting of the Lewes District was held on Saturday 10 October in Cooksbridge. The meeting was well attended by CPRE members. Following Professor Critchley's re-election as Chairman, Maria Caulfield - MP for Lewes (also pictured) spoke about her interest in farming and supporting rural communities against the threat of inappropriate development. Mr Ian Everest gave a very interesting presentation about Southdown Shepherds.

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.