We now have an RSS News Feed. If you install the Google Destop (requires Windows Vista/XP/2000 SP3+ or Mac) and a news reader gadget such as OneFeed, you can have the very latest Lewes Matters news in real-time on your desktop!
And the following feed is for the latest forum posts...
Re:Car Free Development - 2006/05/03 18:22I very much regret having had to make that threat and it was only made when I felt after weeks of me having continually corrected John on what I believed he realised was an inaccurate message he went ahead and printed a flyer that was full of inaccuracies. I really do not know what you find so appalling in that the fact that ifeel the threat and its later removal at least cleared the air. I absolutely respect his right to have an opposite view to mine and I have no right or interest In silencing him or anyone who wishes to make critical comments about our plans. I am also willing to consider amending our plans based on those critical comments and we are still in the process of making amendments to the scheme. You have every right to feel I am uncaring or difficult or whatever I am listening. I however feel that the open dialogue I have become party to has the possibility of descending into a slanging match. Your whole point about a car free development is noted and we are considering this comment . Please spare me the righteous indignation
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
Elinor
Re:Car Free Development - 2006/05/03 19:26Mr Style
I am not Mr Stockdale, so I do not know how accurate his leaflet is. What I do know is that in my opinion the wording of your publicly made threat is intimidating to everyone. I thought you had realised that at the time, when you said you had over-reacted. Going on to say that I am indulging in 'self-righteous indignation' doesnt help either.
On the subject of public transport, my point was different from DEA. My point was that it is unrealistic to say that public transport is good and that car use will be accordingly lower. I can see that there is a difficulty for you here, but like Dea I simply cannot agree that providing loads of parking spaces is good enough, and I am looking forward to seeing the TRICS figures so that we know what our fragile town is being compared with.
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
charles style
Re:Car Free Development - 2006/05/03 21:43Elinor, the very fact that you state that you do not know whether Johns leaflet was accurate illustrates why I felt at the time I had to act to try to stop him putting out a flyer I knew and I believed he knew was inaccurate. Because it is often difficult to overcome the effect of these kind of statements which can colour peoples judgements on the basis of incorrect information. Admittedly putting out the threat may have been a public relations faux pas on my part and I have apologised for the upset caused by it.It was certainly not meant to intimidate anyone and was only meant to highlight the fact that I believed our proposals were being misinterpreted and as a admitedly rather heavy handed way of asking John to be sure of his facts before he made damaging statements.The fact that John has held back from criticising our proposals at least until he is sure of the facts about which he is objecting is very much appreciated. It is possible that once our scheme is finalised John may actually see the potential benefits of the proposals for the town and no longer be so against our plans, it is also possible that he will not like the plans and that he will continue to campaign against it in either event I wish him well and I look forward to hearing his views. All I could ask is that he and others at least keep an open mind until the scheme is finalised and object if they wish to based on clear facts. The traffic modelling will be available for all to see at the time of our planning application.
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
charles style
Re:Car Free Development - 2006/05/03 22:02Elinor, the very fact that you state that you do not know whether Johns leaflet was accurate illustrates why I felt at the time I had to act to try to stop him putting out a flyer I knew and I believed he knew was inaccurate. Because it is often difficult to overcome the effect of these kind of statements which can colour peoples judgements on the basis of incorrect information. Admittedly putting out the threat may have been a public relations faux pas on my part and I have apologised for the upset caused by it.It was certainly not meant to intimidate anyone and was only meant to highlight the fact that I believed our proposals were being misinterpreted and as a admitedly rather heavy handed way of asking John to be sure of his facts before he made damaging statements.The fact that John has held back from criticising our proposals at least until he is sure of the facts about which he is objecting is very much appreciated. It is possible that once our scheme is finalised John may actually see the potential benefits of the proposals for the town and no longer be so against our plans, it is also possible that he will not like the plans and that he will continue to campaign against it in either event I wish him well and I look forward to hearing his views. All I could ask is that he and others at least keep an open mind until the scheme is finalised and object if they wish to based on clear facts. The traffic modelling will be available for all to see at the time of our planning application.
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
Elinor
Re:Car Free Development - 2006/05/03 23:43Mr Style
I am not narrow minded, or self righteous. I don't have a clue why you should care so much about some home-made leaflets. Your casual use of the word 'threat', without even thinking of what the word means is strange.
I hope you will also understand that as wonderful as I am sure you think your ideas are, there are an increasing number of well educated, intelligent well informed people who disagree. You showed us your proposals and asked us to comment, and unfortunately its not all what you wanted to hear. I am sure there are others who like your ideas. The difference is that those who like your ideas are less likely to look further than what they see that they like. There is hardly anyone who doesn't think there is some, or even lots promise in your ideas, there are obvious potential benefits for us all to see.
This isn't the usual cliche of old fogey types who don't like something new,that you are trying to give the impression that it is. Do you really have such contempt for the people of Lewes? Do you think we are so ignorant and unsophisticated?
You are proposing a development so big, and unprecedented that you cannot offer a single example of a similar successfully built development. Is it surprising that we don't want to be put at risk of being an experiment that went wrong? Look at the wreckage of the 1960's half-constructed inner town relief road hacking its way through North, and Little East St. There is a fascinating map showing the missing section snaking sensitively through the Paddock,straight past the castle. The people that thought that was a good idea were as enthusiastic about it, as you are about your proposal. I bet those opposed to it were called narrow minded, and self-righteous too.
I really don't care what the design details of your development is like,( that is just personal taste), I don't care what's in the cinema, or who does the landscaping, as long as you make the scheme lower, less dense, and don't create even more traffic.
And on the subject of traffic, this thread was about car-free developments.
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
adrienne
Re:Car Free Development - 2006/05/04 00:02This thread seems to have lost track of the fact that the proposed Phoenix develpoment would create HUGE and unacceptably increased levels of traffic thoughout Lewes, especially around the peaceful and blessedly underdeveloped Pells preservation area and North Street industrial estate.
NOBODY wants this.
If the developer wants the people of Lewes to back him, he should go for the lower density, car-free, ecologically friendly schemes being proposed on this website by local residents. They're all tried and tested schemes that make money and do not contribute to climate change/local pollution affecting our children's health.
This is a chance for the developer Charles Style to really step up, walk the talk and be truly and not just lip-servicedly making a difference for our community that we love, Lewes.
Come on; you have heard what we want; no more gloss please, Charles Style.
Adrienne
| | You must login if you wish to contribute to this forum.
Dear site visitor at IP address 38.103.63.61. We were forced to make it necessary for you to register and login before making forum postings because of the constant flood of unwanted and often abusive material that was being uploaded by anonymous spammers from all over the world. I'm sure you know the sort of stuff - viagra ads and the like - what a bore! But you can of course read the postings without logging in, and in any case it only takes a couple of minutes to register - you're not losing your privacy, but you're keeping out the spammers. So do please register and continue using the forum - we need your input! Thanks, Lewes Matters Admin.
