I hear Anstone Properties are refusing to redevelop the site of Anstone House because other planning applications have been turned down (The Argus, March 22).
This is a way of blackmailing Brighton and Hove City Council to accept developments which don't conform to planning guidelines.
No doubt if Anstone were to propose a nice redevelopment it would be gratefully accepted.
Anstone's response is part of a huge lobby supported by property developers, Simon Fanshawe, Adam Trimingham, Richard Cairns and others and often reported in The Argus to get the view accepted that unless we build skyscrapers the city will die.
Incidentally, the one proposed for the marina will be about twice as tall as Sussex Heights.
Perhaps Richard Cairns could let us know how many of these type of buildings exist in Oxford.
Brighton and Hove will not die because it does not have any more skyscrapers.
If the marina and King Alfred developments go ahead, there is a queue of other developers waiting to put up more skyscrapers.
Brighton and Hove will be changed for the worse and end up looking like Benidorm or Croydon.
In addition, major infrastructure issues must be resolved before any huge developments get consent.
We are all being threatened with standpipes, so where is the water to come from?
The rubbish landfill sites are almost full, so what will happen to the rubbish?
What facilities are available to deal with the sewage?
How will the increased traffic flow be managed?
The impact on schools and medical facilities must also be considered.
I urge all Brighton and Hove townsfolk to reject these ridiculous proposals.
-David Rose
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article