Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Valerie Paynter

Recent activity

Comments (1)

  • Comment on: Brighton ‘has turned a corner’

    Valerie Paynter's comment 28 November, 2013 6:14 pm

    saveHOVE is one of the amenity voices in Brighton & Hove. The article refers to Brighton in error, might I add. It is the city of Brighton & Hove.

    Jim Stephenson speaks of "overzealous neighbourhood groups" and "ineffective planning". He is wrong on both counts. Or does he disvalue the local knowledge base and discount it?

    This article reads like a moaning minnies cluckfest. Get over yourselves, I say! Only offer good work, not expedient, low cost, low quality visual noise that would be hell to look at and hell to live in. And ensure your planning agent is not cutting the garment too skimpy.

    Planning officers and responding groups and residents notice when information is withheld or wrong. And too many developers play a game of pushing as many awkward questions as possible into the Conditions of Planning list. A good project that is worth builiding should not inspire this kind of chicanery.

    Finally, why does The West Pier Trust NEED to produce a development brief to be unveiled in the new year, if indeed Marks Barfield's i360 overhyped, overexpensive, highly derivative and Blackpoolesque i360 doughnut on a pole is going ahead in the fullness of time? It has planning consent, and is deemed to have begun on the back of a bit of seabed clearance and phaffing about. Why does The West Pier Trust need a development brief NOW? Hmmmm? Bit of a grenade nestling unheralded in the middle of this article if ever I have seen one!

    Nick Lomax would tell you that saveHOVE supported relocation of the Hove retail/leisure focus to the Hove Station area which was back-burnered last year. It was overambitious but going in the right direction for some of us.

    And saveHOVE supported redevelopment of the Sackville Trading Estate which escaped being listed in the article. It has planning consent, renewed this year by P2 (formerly Parkridge) and more land was added this year to the holding to enlarge the area to be redeveloped near Hove Station.

    The financial climate sobered everyone up and hindsight means many are very glad indeed that the Frank Gehry/Piers Gough horror did not go ahead at King Alfred.

    RIBA acknowledges that there are space and light problems in development and it is the developers you need to pinion and go after, not the planning system, not the neighbourhood voices and amenity societies. It is THEY who need to be brought to heel and sorted.