Developers arrive at Lewes Road Community Garden

The Argus: THWARTED: Protestors stop contractors moving their equiptment in THWARTED: Protestors stop contractors moving their equiptment in

UPDATE: Protestors at Lewes Road Community Garden have stopped developers moving onto the site.

Contractors arrived this morning to begin work at the site of the former petrol station in Brighton.

But a small number of protestors, who have been ordered to leave the site, sat in front of the digger and refused to allow it through the garden’s gates.

Click here for a picture gallery from this morning's standoff.

After a short stand-off between the two groups, the contractors loaded the digger back onto a trailer while they waited for further instructions from developer Alburn Minos, which has planning permission to build seven flats and two retail units at the site.

One protestor called Joe said: “We have won the first battle. This is a little victory. This gives us a bit more time to organise more people and make more plans.

"This shows that a few people can make a difference and will continue to do so.”

Police officers attended the incident but no arrests were made.

Comments (50)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:37am Fri 2 Jul 10

Tis I says...

Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?
Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule? Tis I

8:57am Fri 2 Jul 10

Stripes says...

presumably if the 'protesters' are blocking owners access to their own private property the police will arrest them for trespassing and thus physically removing them from the site?

Or is there 'red tape' from preventing police doing the bleeding obvious these days?
presumably if the 'protesters' are blocking owners access to their own private property the police will arrest them for trespassing and thus physically removing them from the site? Or is there 'red tape' from preventing police doing the bleeding obvious these days? Stripes

9:01am Fri 2 Jul 10

Betty Blue says...

Tis I wrote:
Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?
Because they are all on benefits. You and I, as tax payers, are paying for these idiots to protest. You can bet your life they will have plenty of cigarettes and special brew on hand.
But the poor things can't do a days work.
[quote][p][bold]Tis I[/bold] wrote: Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?[/p][/quote]Because they are all on benefits. You and I, as tax payers, are paying for these idiots to protest. You can bet your life they will have plenty of cigarettes and special brew on hand. But the poor things can't do a days work. Betty Blue

9:19am Fri 2 Jul 10

Nyberg says...

I was all for the community garden, all the time the land wasn't actually being used. It was nothing more than a waste tip before they tidied it up and put it to good use.
However, it was never their land, although I think there was a very good argument that the Council should have purchased the land and kept it as a green space. They are quite happy to spend £500,000 on a golden handshake for a chief executive, but seem reluctant to spend money on something genuinely useful to the community.
Having said all that, no useful purpose is being served by blocking the developers access to the site, as they will get on there eventually, no matter what.
It's probably the usual raggle-taggle renta-mob Smash Edo lot, just making a nuisance of themselves in a different way.
I bet you would find that hardly any of them live close to the site or have ever used the community garden!
They just like a confrontation.
I was all for the community garden, all the time the land wasn't actually being used. It was nothing more than a waste tip before they tidied it up and put it to good use. However, it was never their land, although I think there was a very good argument that the Council should have purchased the land and kept it as a green space. They are quite happy to spend £500,000 on a golden handshake for a chief executive, but seem reluctant to spend money on something genuinely useful to the community. Having said all that, no useful purpose is being served by blocking the developers access to the site, as they will get on there eventually, no matter what. It's probably the usual raggle-taggle renta-mob Smash Edo lot, just making a nuisance of themselves in a different way. I bet you would find that hardly any of them live close to the site or have ever used the community garden! They just like a confrontation. Nyberg

10:25am Fri 2 Jul 10

Christophe Hawtree says...

Why not create a garden on another empty site in the area?
Why not create a garden on another empty site in the area? Christophe Hawtree

10:27am Fri 2 Jul 10

TheInsider says...

I supported the green spcae but it's time to call it a day. If this lot is out of work, I suggest the Benefit Agency takes photos of them and stops paying them as they are clearly fit for work but not making themselves available for work.
Therefore, they are not entitled to benefit.
I would also like the BA to take photos of the single crutch carriers of the city who drag legs along and then when a bus comes or they need to get moving, the crutch goes under their arm and they literally leg-it.
It's a disgraceful con pretending to be injured or disabled.
I supported the green spcae but it's time to call it a day. If this lot is out of work, I suggest the Benefit Agency takes photos of them and stops paying them as they are clearly fit for work but not making themselves available for work. Therefore, they are not entitled to benefit. I would also like the BA to take photos of the single crutch carriers of the city who drag legs along and then when a bus comes or they need to get moving, the crutch goes under their arm and they literally leg-it. It's a disgraceful con pretending to be injured or disabled. TheInsider

10:28am Fri 2 Jul 10

PIGCITY says...

Whilst I am in favour of retaining as much green space as possible. Was the area somewhere I would want to take my kids, no. Was it a space I would like to sit in on a Summers day, no. Was it ideal spot for street drinkers to spend the day, yes.

If its green space you're after get on your bike, you've got a bloody big park at the end of the Lewes Road...
Whilst I am in favour of retaining as much green space as possible. Was the area somewhere I would want to take my kids, no. Was it a space I would like to sit in on a Summers day, no. Was it ideal spot for street drinkers to spend the day, yes. If its green space you're after get on your bike, you've got a bloody big park at the end of the Lewes Road... PIGCITY

10:31am Fri 2 Jul 10

Tetsugaku-San says...

Tis I wrote:
Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?
Shut up you sanctimonious wind bag - you appear to be on the bloody internet and not working, how the hell do you know anything about the people protesting? Maybe they thought so strongly about it they took time off?

Maybe someone not currently employed isn't automatically scum you judgmental waste of space.
[quote][p][bold]Tis I[/bold] wrote: Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?[/p][/quote]Shut up you sanctimonious wind bag - you appear to be on the bloody internet and not working, how the hell do you know anything about the people protesting? Maybe they thought so strongly about it they took time off? Maybe someone not currently employed isn't automatically scum you judgmental waste of space. Tetsugaku-San

10:33am Fri 2 Jul 10

Tetsugaku-San says...

Stripes wrote:
presumably if the 'protesters' are blocking owners access to their own private property the police will arrest them for trespassing and thus physically removing them from the site?

Or is there 'red tape' from preventing police doing the bleeding obvious these days?
Protesting, thankfully, although no thanks to people like you, is still egal in this country and protected. People have a right to say if they are unhappy with things and there are a great many people very unhappy with the number of bloody tesco stores cropping up all other the place ESPECIALLY when the road is already well served byt every shop you could need.
[quote][p][bold]Stripes[/bold] wrote: presumably if the 'protesters' are blocking owners access to their own private property the police will arrest them for trespassing and thus physically removing them from the site? Or is there 'red tape' from preventing police doing the bleeding obvious these days?[/p][/quote]Protesting, thankfully, although no thanks to people like you, is still egal in this country and protected. People have a right to say if they are unhappy with things and there are a great many people very unhappy with the number of bloody tesco stores cropping up all other the place ESPECIALLY when the road is already well served byt every shop you could need. Tetsugaku-San

10:36am Fri 2 Jul 10

Tetsugaku-San says...

Betty Blue wrote:
Tis I wrote:
Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?
Because they are all on benefits. You and I, as tax payers, are paying for these idiots to protest. You can bet your life they will have plenty of cigarettes and special brew on hand.
But the poor things can't do a days work.
How ON EARTH do you justify this comment? Do you spend all day reading the Daily Mail and have a book of Richard Littlejohn quotes kept by the loo?

You have no idea who these people are and making sweeping, regurgitated statements about things you don't understand just goes further in pointing out how few of your opinions you are able to form on your own.

When was the last time you got out from behind that office desk you'll probably die behind, to stand up for the rights of your community, fellow man or anything else for that matter?
[quote][p][bold]Betty Blue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tis I[/bold] wrote: Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?[/p][/quote]Because they are all on benefits. You and I, as tax payers, are paying for these idiots to protest. You can bet your life they will have plenty of cigarettes and special brew on hand. But the poor things can't do a days work.[/p][/quote]How ON EARTH do you justify this comment? Do you spend all day reading the Daily Mail and have a book of Richard Littlejohn quotes kept by the loo? You have no idea who these people are and making sweeping, regurgitated statements about things you don't understand just goes further in pointing out how few of your opinions you are able to form on your own. When was the last time you got out from behind that office desk you'll probably die behind, to stand up for the rights of your community, fellow man or anything else for that matter? Tetsugaku-San

10:53am Fri 2 Jul 10

dolphy says...

Apparently the land owner agreed they could use the land until he sold it. Refusing to leave because they don't agree with his choice of buyer tramples all over their gentleman's agreement. He won't be doing that again. His gesture was a rare thing in this day and age, and will sadly become more rare now that he's been deceived.
Apparently the land owner agreed they could use the land until he sold it. Refusing to leave because they don't agree with his choice of buyer tramples all over their gentleman's agreement. He won't be doing that again. His gesture was a rare thing in this day and age, and will sadly become more rare now that he's been deceived. dolphy

11:00am Fri 2 Jul 10

Tony Davenport says...

Rights of the community are all well and good, but they are superseded by the rights of the property owner.

You don't have any rights, so why not just move on? And if Tesco open there - so what? Lots of people like and use Tesco. Not everyone is of the belief that they intend to kill all the firstborn children in Brighton and Hove unless you paint your ClubCard number on your front door.

Tony Davenport
Rights of the community are all well and good, but they are superseded by the rights of the property owner. You don't have any rights, so why not just move on? And if Tesco open there - so what? Lots of people like and use Tesco. Not everyone is of the belief that they intend to kill all the firstborn children in Brighton and Hove unless you paint your ClubCard number on your front door. Tony Davenport Tony Davenport

11:10am Fri 2 Jul 10

Christmas Elf says...

"One protestor called Joe said: “We have won the first battle. This is a little victory. This gives us a bit more time to organise more people and make more plans."

Joe, give up. You are never going to beat them. They have the courts and the law on their side. Pack up, go home and let the bulldozers roll!
"One protestor called Joe said: “We have won the first battle. This is a little victory. This gives us a bit more time to organise more people and make more plans." Joe, give up. You are never going to beat them. They have the courts and the law on their side. Pack up, go home and let the bulldozers roll! Christmas Elf

11:11am Fri 2 Jul 10

RoddyG says...

I would suggest that anyone interested should go and have a look at what's going on and make their own judgement on the protestors.

I do think that they look like the usual suspects. Lots of food dyed hair and an overwhelming lack of personal hygiene.

Where is the lovely Caroline Lucas when you need her? Probably at home in Oxford!
I would suggest that anyone interested should go and have a look at what's going on and make their own judgement on the protestors. I do think that they look like the usual suspects. Lots of food dyed hair and an overwhelming lack of personal hygiene. Where is the lovely Caroline Lucas when you need her? Probably at home in Oxford! RoddyG

11:14am Fri 2 Jul 10

Charismatic Andrew says...

Tetsugaku-San wrote:
Tis I wrote: Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?
Shut up you sanctimonious wind bag - you appear to be on the bloody internet and not working, how the hell do you know anything about the people protesting? Maybe they thought so strongly about it they took time off? Maybe someone not currently employed isn't automatically scum you judgmental waste of space.
Totally agree with you Tetsugaku-San. These people almost certainly took time off work. Or perhaps they're taking advantage of a bit of free time in between the Hong Kong Stock Exchange closing and the New York Stock Exchange opening. Once the NYSE opens I expect they'll all be busy trading shares on the NASDAQ.
[quote][p][bold]Tetsugaku-San[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tis I[/bold] wrote: Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?[/p][/quote]Shut up you sanctimonious wind bag - you appear to be on the bloody internet and not working, how the hell do you know anything about the people protesting? Maybe they thought so strongly about it they took time off? Maybe someone not currently employed isn't automatically scum you judgmental waste of space.[/p][/quote]Totally agree with you Tetsugaku-San. These people almost certainly took time off work. Or perhaps they're taking advantage of a bit of free time in between the Hong Kong Stock Exchange closing and the New York Stock Exchange opening. Once the NYSE opens I expect they'll all be busy trading shares on the NASDAQ. Charismatic Andrew

11:23am Fri 2 Jul 10

pilkenstein says...

Whilst I have no idea whether the protestors are gainfully employed or workshy hippies, the situation is that they've made use of the space whilst it was empty, now it's time to give back to the lawful owners what is after all, rightfully theirs.

If they wish to volunteer their own homes (5 bed mansions or bedsits, who knows?) to be knocked down to make way for more green space, let 'em do it - otherwise they should just stop acting like they have the spoort of the 'people' and just go away :-)
Whilst I have no idea whether the protestors are gainfully employed or workshy hippies, the situation is that they've made use of the space whilst it was empty, now it's time to give back to the lawful owners what is after all, rightfully theirs. If they wish to volunteer their own homes (5 bed mansions or bedsits, who knows?) to be knocked down to make way for more green space, let 'em do it - otherwise they should just stop acting like they have the spoort of the 'people' and just go away :-) pilkenstein

11:26am Fri 2 Jul 10

pilkenstein says...

and Tets - presumably you're stuck behind YOUR Desk in London, instead of protesting about the 'much needed green space' in your own town, so simmer down eh?

If they want to 'protest', fine, that's legal, the Police should have no input.

If they are obstructing people going about their lawful business, the Police should do what they're paid to do :-)
and Tets - presumably you're stuck behind YOUR Desk in London, instead of protesting about the 'much needed green space' in your own town, so simmer down eh? If they want to 'protest', fine, that's legal, the Police should have no input. If they are obstructing people going about their lawful business, the Police should do what they're paid to do :-) pilkenstein

11:39am Fri 2 Jul 10

pilkenstein says...

as always, it's the minority of Green supporters in the area (Lucas only got 29% of the vote, remember?) who are laying claim to the Murdoch-esque 'Right-minded people' mantra... Do the protestors have the support of the majority of people? I doubt it.
as always, it's the minority of Green supporters in the area (Lucas only got 29% of the vote, remember?) who are laying claim to the Murdoch-esque 'Right-minded people' mantra... Do the protestors have the support of the majority of people? I doubt it. pilkenstein

11:50am Fri 2 Jul 10

Stripes says...

I agree with pilkenstein, why aren't the police doing their job and removing trespassers from private property?

Its a shame that a gesture of goodwill from a landowner and a spontaneous community effort from local residents to brighten the place up now appears to be well and truly gatecrashed by a bunch of career protesters.
I agree with pilkenstein, why aren't the police doing their job and removing trespassers from private property? Its a shame that a gesture of goodwill from a landowner and a spontaneous community effort from local residents to brighten the place up now appears to be well and truly gatecrashed by a bunch of career protesters. Stripes

11:52am Fri 2 Jul 10

Tis I says...

Tetsugaku-San wrote:
Tis I wrote: Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?
Shut up you sanctimonious wind bag - you appear to be on the bloody internet and not working, how the hell do you know anything about the people protesting? Maybe they thought so strongly about it they took time off? Maybe someone not currently employed isn't automatically scum you judgmental waste of space.
I'm multi-tasking at my business just before i go to do some Volontary work. Green space pah!! what a load of cobblers, it's not theirs and never will be! I'ts an old petrol station that needs re-delelopment simple pimple.
[quote][p][bold]Tetsugaku-San[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tis I[/bold] wrote: Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?[/p][/quote]Shut up you sanctimonious wind bag - you appear to be on the bloody internet and not working, how the hell do you know anything about the people protesting? Maybe they thought so strongly about it they took time off? Maybe someone not currently employed isn't automatically scum you judgmental waste of space.[/p][/quote]I'm multi-tasking at my business just before i go to do some Volontary work. Green space pah!! what a load of cobblers, it's not theirs and never will be! I'ts an old petrol station that needs re-delelopment simple pimple. Tis I

12:33pm Fri 2 Jul 10

RoddyG says...

Caroline Lucas MP writes on her website about "Supermarket land grab on Lewes Road".
Actually, the land owners have the right to develop the site in accordance with the planning consent which has been granted.
Clearly, the Oxford resident MP belives that there is no such thing as private property. New politics? Same old marxist tripe from the Greens.
Caroline Lucas MP writes on her website about "Supermarket land grab on Lewes Road". Actually, the land owners have the right to develop the site in accordance with the planning consent which has been granted. Clearly, the Oxford resident MP belives that there is no such thing as private property. New politics? Same old marxist tripe from the Greens. RoddyG

12:54pm Fri 2 Jul 10

Lewesroadresident says...

Well done Tetsugaku-San for criticising the ridiculous stereotyping that occurs whenever this topic is mentioned. As you point out, the commentators have no knowledge of the personal circumstances of those involved in the protesting. The behaviour of all those who have ever used the garden is a lot better than those who use the Franklin Tavern opposite. It's also laughable that they seem to think it's only hippies who are 'benefit scroungers'. Doesn't seem to have occured to them that many of the worst fraudsters who are convicted have families and can in no way be described as hippies!

pilkenstein, B-Right-On among others seems obsessed with the fact Caroline Lucas only got 29% of the vote- so what? She still won. All political parties win seats with a relatively small percentage of the vote as a result of FPTP. The Green Party want PR to be introduced, which ironically would benefit people like pilkenstein!
Well done Tetsugaku-San for criticising the ridiculous stereotyping that occurs whenever this topic is mentioned. As you point out, the commentators have no knowledge of the personal circumstances of those involved in the protesting. The behaviour of all those who have ever used the garden is a lot better than those who use the Franklin Tavern opposite. It's also laughable that they seem to think it's only hippies who are 'benefit scroungers'. Doesn't seem to have occured to them that many of the worst fraudsters who are convicted have families and can in no way be described as hippies! pilkenstein, B-Right-On among others seems obsessed with the fact Caroline Lucas only got 29% of the vote- so what? She still won. All political parties win seats with a relatively small percentage of the vote as a result of FPTP. The Green Party want PR to be introduced, which ironically would benefit people like pilkenstein! Lewesroadresident

1:11pm Fri 2 Jul 10

rinoa2530 says...

Tetsugaku-San wrote:
Stripes wrote:
presumably if the 'protesters' are blocking owners access to their own private property the police will arrest them for trespassing and thus physically removing them from the site?

Or is there 'red tape' from preventing police doing the bleeding obvious these days?
Protesting, thankfully, although no thanks to people like you, is still egal in this country and protected. People have a right to say if they are unhappy with things and there are a great many people very unhappy with the number of bloody tesco stores cropping up all other the place ESPECIALLY when the road is already well served byt every shop you could need.
Well although it is still legal and protected, it is not legal on land which has been given an eviction notice, and which is owned privately. They knew that they were allowed the garden on the prerequisite that they would move once the decision was made by the owners to take it back. That decision has been taken, and hence the police should have arrested them from tresspassing.
Yes, it's legal, but hey mate, that's the law. They're protesting on privately owned land, and blocking access of developers, hence should have been arrested.

Also, although one of the retail units is being taken over by Tesco, there will also be more apartments being built and more opportunities for people to get on the property ladder, which is surely more useful than a garden that only a selection of people in Brighton use, especially where there is the level just down the road.
[quote][p][bold]Tetsugaku-San[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stripes[/bold] wrote: presumably if the 'protesters' are blocking owners access to their own private property the police will arrest them for trespassing and thus physically removing them from the site? Or is there 'red tape' from preventing police doing the bleeding obvious these days?[/p][/quote]Protesting, thankfully, although no thanks to people like you, is still egal in this country and protected. People have a right to say if they are unhappy with things and there are a great many people very unhappy with the number of bloody tesco stores cropping up all other the place ESPECIALLY when the road is already well served byt every shop you could need.[/p][/quote]Well although it is still legal and protected, it is not legal on land which has been given an eviction notice, and which is owned privately. They knew that they were allowed the garden on the prerequisite that they would move once the decision was made by the owners to take it back. That decision has been taken, and hence the police should have arrested them from tresspassing. Yes, it's legal, but hey mate, that's the law. They're protesting on privately owned land, and blocking access of developers, hence should have been arrested. Also, although one of the retail units is being taken over by Tesco, there will also be more apartments being built and more opportunities for people to get on the property ladder, which is surely more useful than a garden that only a selection of people in Brighton use, especially where there is the level just down the road. rinoa2530

1:14pm Fri 2 Jul 10

Spanners says...

These protestors are going to land the guy who headed up the Community Garden with a 6 grand liability bill. They are a breakaway group and nothing to to original bunch who , relativley gracefully, packed up and left. They recognised that the land was not theirs and that the owners had every right to develop as per granted planning consent. Who do this lot think they are helping ? No business will allow these community gardens in the future due to this fiasco and no sane person would want to head one up even if they did (on the basis that once they left it would be hijacked by the "prostestor" brigade and make them liable). This bloke Joe is wrong, his "little victory" is a blinkered viewpoint. The bigger picture is one of defeat if you look beyond this particular site.
These protestors are going to land the guy who headed up the Community Garden with a 6 grand liability bill. They are a breakaway group and nothing to to original bunch who , relativley gracefully, packed up and left. They recognised that the land was not theirs and that the owners had every right to develop as per granted planning consent. Who do this lot think they are helping ? No business will allow these community gardens in the future due to this fiasco and no sane person would want to head one up even if they did (on the basis that once they left it would be hijacked by the "prostestor" brigade and make them liable). This bloke Joe is wrong, his "little victory" is a blinkered viewpoint. The bigger picture is one of defeat if you look beyond this particular site. Spanners

1:44pm Fri 2 Jul 10

Thumper Hove says...

RoddyG wrote:
Caroline Lucas MP writes on her website about "Supermarket land grab on Lewes Road". Actually, the land owners have the right to develop the site in accordance with the planning consent which has been granted. Clearly, the Oxford resident MP belives that there is no such thing as private property. New politics? Same old marxist tripe from the Greens.
I think that as a Brighton MP, Lucas should be issuing statements distancing herself from the so-called 'community' garden, and emphasising that she agrees with UK Laws with regard to trespass and ownership. At the moment it appears the Greens have aligned themselves to citizens who think laws do not apply to themselves.
RIP Community Gardens - after this sorry saga, no sane landowner will offer his/her land to the community ever again.
[quote][p][bold]RoddyG[/bold] wrote: Caroline Lucas MP writes on her website about "Supermarket land grab on Lewes Road". Actually, the land owners have the right to develop the site in accordance with the planning consent which has been granted. Clearly, the Oxford resident MP belives that there is no such thing as private property. New politics? Same old marxist tripe from the Greens.[/p][/quote]I think that as a Brighton MP, Lucas should be issuing statements distancing herself from the so-called 'community' garden, and emphasising that she agrees with UK Laws with regard to trespass and ownership. At the moment it appears the Greens have aligned themselves to citizens who think laws do not apply to themselves. RIP Community Gardens - after this sorry saga, no sane landowner will offer his/her land to the community ever again. Thumper Hove

2:37pm Fri 2 Jul 10

Tis I says...

Christophe Hawtree wrote:
Why not create a garden on another empty site in the area?
Yes Dungerness is nice, go there!
[quote][p][bold]Christophe Hawtree[/bold] wrote: Why not create a garden on another empty site in the area?[/p][/quote]Yes Dungerness is nice, go there! Tis I

4:26pm Fri 2 Jul 10

caeos says...

so we not only have an MEP supporting squatting but we have a publicly funded training scheme advertised as being held at the site and using it as an example
http://bit.ly/d5Glo0
so we not only have an MEP supporting squatting but we have a publicly funded training scheme advertised as being held at the site and using it as an example http://bit.ly/d5Glo0 caeos

4:36pm Fri 2 Jul 10

PeteBrighton says...

As a Lewes road resident I woud like to be able to walk from the Co-Op to the Turkish Stoke without having to avoid the pavemnent which is full of people, vehicles, swearing and drug deals all day and most of the night which accompanies these non Lewes Road residents doing their 'protest'.
As a Lewes road resident I woud like to be able to walk from the Co-Op to the Turkish Stoke without having to avoid the pavemnent which is full of people, vehicles, swearing and drug deals all day and most of the night which accompanies these non Lewes Road residents doing their 'protest'. PeteBrighton

4:38pm Fri 2 Jul 10

PeteBrighton says...

As a Lewes road resident I woud like to be able to walk from the Co-Op to the Turkish Stoke without having to avoid the pavemnent which is full of people, vehicles, swearing and drug deals all day and most of the night which accompanies these non Lewes Road residents doing their 'protest'.
As a Lewes road resident I woud like to be able to walk from the Co-Op to the Turkish Stoke without having to avoid the pavemnent which is full of people, vehicles, swearing and drug deals all day and most of the night which accompanies these non Lewes Road residents doing their 'protest'. PeteBrighton

4:58pm Fri 2 Jul 10

dixie normous says...

you want them off the site, offer them a job, you wont see them for dust.
you want them off the site, offer them a job, you wont see them for dust. dixie normous

5:08pm Fri 2 Jul 10

monty sidewinder says...

Christophe Hawtree wrote:
Why not create a garden on another empty site in the area?
good comment - isn't the other old texaco site still empty at the bottom of hollingdean rd? the original garden group backed down gracefully and left when they said they would but all this today is another group with a totally different agenda - i feel sorry for the guy who is gonna be made liabel for 6K's worth of legal costs because of this.
[quote][p][bold]Christophe Hawtree[/bold] wrote: Why not create a garden on another empty site in the area?[/p][/quote]good comment - isn't the other old texaco site still empty at the bottom of hollingdean rd? the original garden group backed down gracefully and left when they said they would but all this today is another group with a totally different agenda - i feel sorry for the guy who is gonna be made liabel for 6K's worth of legal costs because of this. monty sidewinder

5:47pm Fri 2 Jul 10

yorkie44 says...

Perhaps they could turn all the grass verges into nice little gardens so that we don't have to look at areas of dust and mud. The must add up to quite a big area over the city. They are welcome to plant my mud patch anythime - council permitting.
Perhaps they could turn all the grass verges into nice little gardens so that we don't have to look at areas of dust and mud. The must add up to quite a big area over the city. They are welcome to plant my mud patch anythime - council permitting. yorkie44

6:45pm Fri 2 Jul 10

davyboy says...

there are plenty of other sites for 'peace gardens', and this is now private land, which is for re-development. therefore these 'protestors' are trespassing, and should be removed forcibly. the best thing would have been to drive the bulldozer straight onto the site. they would soon move. whether or not they are part of the great unwashed, benefit brigade, they are committing offences!
there are plenty of other sites for 'peace gardens', and this is now private land, which is for re-development. therefore these 'protestors' are trespassing, and should be removed forcibly. the best thing would have been to drive the bulldozer straight onto the site. they would soon move. whether or not they are part of the great unwashed, benefit brigade, they are committing offences! davyboy

9:41pm Fri 2 Jul 10

andyelevator says...

These protestors are obviously so dim they do not realise they have shot themselves in the foot!!!

The landowner allowed them to use the land until it was REQUIRED!!They reneged on that deal and no because of this no other developer will do this again.So can someone explain how this action has HELPED ANYONE?!!!

Also to all the other whingers on here who prattle on about the right to protest. Yes you have that right because we have something called a DEMOCRACY.We also have something called the LAW OF THE LAND-which means you shouldnt be on someone elses land WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION!!!

The last time i checked stopping someone legally going about their business did not count as "actively seeking work" so throw the book at them if they are on benefits!!!

And before all you whingers so why aren't I working I am self employed and contribute to the economy unlike some!!!

Do not abuse your right to protest by breaking the law!!!

You "protestors" personally make me sick!!!!

And finally before anyone moans I don't come from the area I spent many years living at 94 Lewes Road so I know a great deal about the area!!!
These protestors are obviously so dim they do not realise they have shot themselves in the foot!!! The landowner allowed them to use the land until it was REQUIRED!!They reneged on that deal and no because of this no other developer will do this again.So can someone explain how this action has HELPED ANYONE?!!! Also to all the other whingers on here who prattle on about the right to protest. Yes you have that right because we have something called a DEMOCRACY.We also have something called the LAW OF THE LAND-which means you shouldnt be on someone elses land WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION!!! The last time i checked stopping someone legally going about their business did not count as "actively seeking work" so throw the book at them if they are on benefits!!! And before all you whingers so why aren't I working I am self employed and contribute to the economy unlike some!!! Do not abuse your right to protest by breaking the law!!! You "protestors" personally make me sick!!!! And finally before anyone moans I don't come from the area I spent many years living at 94 Lewes Road so I know a great deal about the area!!! andyelevator

9:41pm Fri 2 Jul 10

Hovesage says...

Unfortunately the Trespass law is a civil law, requiring the developer to go back to court, or they could ask the court balifs to enforce the last judgement made in favour of the land owners.

This however will take time, and at cost to the developer, who will no doubt want to pursue a claim to get back the futher costs incured.

The people ocupying the land at the moment will find it very hard to disasociate themselfs from the chap who was made liable for i belive £6000, and is now very likeley to pursued for this money.

The protesters have made their point, and should now move away from this site.

They have now made it almost impossible for anyone/group to undertake a simular project for other land owners will not want a repeat of this fiasco.

What started out as a good idea, has now decended into almost anachy, and thoes people involved in the protest only have themselves to blame for the concequencies.
Unfortunately the Trespass law is a civil law, requiring the developer to go back to court, or they could ask the court balifs to enforce the last judgement made in favour of the land owners. This however will take time, and at cost to the developer, who will no doubt want to pursue a claim to get back the futher costs incured. The people ocupying the land at the moment will find it very hard to disasociate themselfs from the chap who was made liable for i belive £6000, and is now very likeley to pursued for this money. The protesters have made their point, and should now move away from this site. They have now made it almost impossible for anyone/group to undertake a simular project for other land owners will not want a repeat of this fiasco. What started out as a good idea, has now decended into almost anachy, and thoes people involved in the protest only have themselves to blame for the concequencies. Hovesage

10:31pm Fri 2 Jul 10

simonjay1 says...

Stop this 'nice developer - gentlemans agreement' stuff! The developers let the community garden flourish because they didn't want to pay for security and didn't really care what happened on the site. Happens we got nice urban gardeners, but the developers wouldn't care if they were not so nice.
This will make no difference to any future intiatives.
Stop this 'nice developer - gentlemans agreement' stuff! The developers let the community garden flourish because they didn't want to pay for security and didn't really care what happened on the site. Happens we got nice urban gardeners, but the developers wouldn't care if they were not so nice. This will make no difference to any future intiatives. simonjay1

1:32am Sat 3 Jul 10

Ms Laite says...

Again I will reiterate the facts.
It was a poorly maintained (by the land owners) Urban dump. A number of residents decided to do something about it.
They came to a temporary agreement with the land owners to try and turn into something useful for the surrounding community. Once it had been cleared of the crap. Which the land owners hadn't done once in 4 years! People started to warm to the idea that community spirit might be quite a nice idea. A lot of support came out of it.
Over 4000 signatures in support of the ethos and against the **** planning process.
The original team decided to make a stand and fight for it. They lost that battle. 21st june 2010. And as per the court order, well argued on both sides. They returned the land with dignity to the owners. The owner's subcontractors (the owners couldn't actually be bothered to turn up which **** the subcontractors off no end) whilst putting a great big chain and padlock on the gate failed to actually secure the site. Leaving the original gaping big gap in the fence.
Wayhay to secure your property and stick to your side of the court order.
Doh!
After that person or persons unknown to the residents gained access to the site.
This is all due to poor/possibly illegal planning in Brighton. God it took them 15 years to sort out the Falmer Stadium. By which time we were well out of the league!
And look at the sterling job Brighton Planning did with the West Pier!
Again I will reiterate the facts. It was a poorly maintained (by the land owners) Urban dump. A number of residents decided to do something about it. They came to a temporary agreement with the land owners to try and turn into something useful for the surrounding community. Once it had been cleared of the crap. Which the land owners hadn't done once in 4 years! People started to warm to the idea that community spirit might be quite a nice idea. A lot of support came out of it. Over 4000 signatures in support of the ethos and against the **** planning process. The original team decided to make a stand and fight for it. They lost that battle. 21st june 2010. And as per the court order, well argued on both sides. They returned the land with dignity to the owners. The owner's subcontractors (the owners couldn't actually be bothered to turn up which **** the subcontractors off no end) whilst putting a great big chain and padlock on the gate failed to actually secure the site. Leaving the original gaping big gap in the fence. Wayhay to secure your property and stick to your side of the court order. Doh! After that person or persons unknown to the residents gained access to the site. This is all due to poor/possibly illegal planning in Brighton. God it took them 15 years to sort out the Falmer Stadium. By which time we were well out of the league! And look at the sterling job Brighton Planning did with the West Pier! Ms Laite

2:49am Sat 3 Jul 10

Ms Laite says...

Also check out the petition if you want to check your facts. The residents didn't make up all these peoples.
http://www.gopetitio
n.co.uk/petitions/sa
y-no-to-tesco-on-lew
es-road/signatures.h
tml
Also check out the petition if you want to check your facts. The residents didn't make up all these peoples. http://www.gopetitio n.co.uk/petitions/sa y-no-to-tesco-on-lew es-road/signatures.h tml Ms Laite

1:24pm Sat 3 Jul 10

worthinglogic says...

Tis I wrote:
Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?
Because some people are philanthropic and actually give a **** about what happens in their local community, unlike yourself.
[quote][p][bold]Tis I[/bold] wrote: Why are the protestors not at work? How do they fit it all in to their busy schedule?[/p][/quote]Because some people are philanthropic and actually give a **** about what happens in their local community, unlike yourself. worthinglogic

6:18pm Sat 3 Jul 10

PeteBrighton says...

Not much 'community' at the Lewes Road 'garden' more like siege mentality.
Not much 'community' at the Lewes Road 'garden' more like siege mentality. PeteBrighton

9:09pm Sat 3 Jul 10

Ms Laite says...

Today, the ‘big four’ supermarkets – Tesco, Asda, Sainsburys, Morrisons – control over ¾ of the annual £110 billion spent annually on groceries in the UK.
1. Tesco alone controls 31%.
And the expansion is not stopping. Supermarkets claim that when they come to town they bring choice, cheap food, and jobs. But by dominating food sales, supermarkets take away choice by closing down existing shops. In recent years, more than 2,000 independent stores have closed every year.
2. Small and independent stores have struggled in the recession while supermarkets continue to gain market share and post record profits. The Local Data Company reported in
July 2009 that 12,000 independent stores had closed in the first half of 2009 alone.
3. Supermarkets may sell certain items at knock-down prices, but fresh and healthy food is often cheaper in markets and local shops, while the profits the supermarkets make are siphoned away from communities to distant shareholders. And they may bring in some employment in the supermarket, but they also drive other jobs away – with a net loss of 276 per new superstore, according to one study.
4.Local planning authorities are required to produce a set of planning documents called Local Development Frameworks to determine how development takes place in towns and the countryside. The planning policies contained in the LDF, together with regional planning policies are the key guidance that is taken into account when planning decisions – including decisions on whether to allow new supermarkets - are made by local councils.
Information taken from the Competition Commission, 2008. The supply of groceries in the UK market investigation final report.
BBC on line 31st July 2009. 19,000 shops "closed this year". http://news.bbc.co.u

k/1/hi/business/8177

502.stm
National Retail Planning Forum. 1998. The impact of out of town food superstores on market towns and district centres
Today, the ‘big four’ supermarkets – Tesco, Asda, Sainsburys, Morrisons – control over ¾ of the annual £110 billion spent annually on groceries in the UK. 1. Tesco alone controls 31%. And the expansion is not stopping. Supermarkets claim that when they come to town they bring choice, cheap food, and jobs. But by dominating food sales, supermarkets take away choice by closing down existing shops. In recent years, more than 2,000 independent stores have closed every year. 2. Small and independent stores have struggled in the recession while supermarkets continue to gain market share and post record profits. The Local Data Company reported in July 2009 that 12,000 independent stores had closed in the first half of 2009 alone. 3. Supermarkets may sell certain items at knock-down prices, but fresh and healthy food is often cheaper in markets and local shops, while the profits the supermarkets make are siphoned away from communities to distant shareholders. And they may bring in some employment in the supermarket, but they also drive other jobs away – with a net loss of 276 per new superstore, according to one study. 4.Local planning authorities are required to produce a set of planning documents called Local Development Frameworks to determine how development takes place in towns and the countryside. The planning policies contained in the LDF, together with regional planning policies are the key guidance that is taken into account when planning decisions – including decisions on whether to allow new supermarkets - are made by local councils. Information taken from the Competition Commission, 2008. The supply of groceries in the UK market investigation final report. BBC on line 31st July 2009. 19,000 shops "closed this year". http://news.bbc.co.u k/1/hi/business/8177 502.stm National Retail Planning Forum. 1998. The impact of out of town food superstores on market towns and district centres Ms Laite

9:53am Sun 4 Jul 10

Bartram says...

So according to Lucus,the people of Brighton don't want another Tesco.
Well I do!
It might drive those rip off merchants Co-Op out the area
So according to Lucus,the people of Brighton don't want another Tesco. Well I do! It might drive those rip off merchants Co-Op out the area Bartram

10:30am Sun 4 Jul 10

PeteBrighton says...

Good on you, Bartram. Co-Op in Lewes Road sell shabby goods, dirty shop, surly slow-to-serve staff and the whole shopping experience is dismal. Tesco at least enables a happier more comfortable experience. The community tip protesters offer NOTHING to the area except those things wrapped in bits of paper they pass around a fair bit.
Good on you, Bartram. Co-Op in Lewes Road sell shabby goods, dirty shop, surly slow-to-serve staff and the whole shopping experience is dismal. Tesco at least enables a happier more comfortable experience. The community tip protesters offer NOTHING to the area except those things wrapped in bits of paper they pass around a fair bit. PeteBrighton

8:28pm Sun 4 Jul 10

Ms Laite says...

Bartram wrote:
So according to Lucus,the people of Brighton don't want another Tesco.
Well I do!
It might drive those rip off merchants Co-Op out the area
To be replaced by another bunch of rip off merchants. Why can't we have an indoor small traders market built with social housing on top? Surely that would support local business and plough money directly back into the City rather than straight into the back pockets.
[quote][p][bold]Bartram[/bold] wrote: So according to Lucus,the people of Brighton don't want another Tesco. Well I do! It might drive those rip off merchants Co-Op out the area[/p][/quote]To be replaced by another bunch of rip off merchants. Why can't we have an indoor small traders market built with social housing on top? Surely that would support local business and plough money directly back into the City rather than straight into the back pockets. Ms Laite

10:27am Mon 5 Jul 10

Tony Davenport says...

To address Ms. Laite's points:

1. You say that ¾ of the money spent annually on groceries is spent in the four major supermarkets. And? People CHOOSE to do so. Oh no, I suppose you would have us believe, they're FORCED TO cos when a supermarket arrives all the smaller shops close. No doubt you can provide some evidence of this …

2. And here we are! The Local Data Company says that 12,000 independent shops were forced to close in the first half of 2009. Maybe so, but er …. a recession perhaps? Why has this anything to do with a supermarket opening?

3. You say that much fresh produce can be obtained cheaper from local markets. Yes, this is most likely true. However this is not an argument against the supermarkets. People are choosing (yes, there's that word again) to shop at Tesco, Sainsburys or whoever. Yes, a market stall could provide them with cheaper cauliflower but do they also have nappies, toothpaste, CDs etc. etc.? People often select convenience over price. And a net loss of 276 per supermarket "according to one study". Er … what study?! Ahhhh the one from 1990? Well here we are 20 years later. Where are the decimated communities? The hundreds of thousands out of work as a direct result of supermarkets opening branches?
4. Here you confirmation bias goes into overdrive. You post link about how 19,000 shops closed in 2009, as if this adds weight to your argument. If you read the report 12,000 independent shops closed along with 7000 branches of major chains. Evil Tesco at work? No … it's called a recession.

I'll let you into a little secret. Many independent shops, predominantly late night convenience ones, abuse their monopolistic position. They take advantage of the fact you want something and there isn't a supermarket open.

But let's move to Brighton. I'd love to know where all the closed independent stores are. Local business Taj CHOSE to open opposite Waitrose and were so successful they opened a THIRD branch. Has the Sainbury's on Western Road driven the convenience shops in Preston Street to closure? No. Independent retailer Grocer and Grain opened in almost direct line of sight of a Tesco Express on Queen's Road. They're doing well.

After local residents and the Green Party ranted on about and protested against Starbucks opening in St. James' Street and killing independent coffee shops, a year after it has opened not one single independent coffee shop has closed.

Even the Reverent Billy came over to protest that one, along with his 'church' of anti-shopping (strangely his suit and shoes looked like they may have been purchased from a shop). Now anyone who follows this anti-consumerist stance is fine by me. We're free to choose whatever we want to. Just p*ss off to some god-forsaken island with no electricity (or supermarkets!) and leave the rest of us to get on with it.

Of course we should support honest, local businesses and the way we do that is to chose them over the supermarkets. Market forces in effect like this is freedom - legislating and trying to control which shops open where is the very opposite.

Tony Davenport
To address Ms. Laite's points: 1. You say that ¾ of the money spent annually on groceries is spent in the four major supermarkets. And? People CHOOSE to do so. Oh no, I suppose you would have us believe, they're FORCED TO cos when a supermarket arrives all the smaller shops close. No doubt you can provide some evidence of this … 2. And here we are! The Local Data Company says that 12,000 independent shops were forced to close in the first half of 2009. Maybe so, but er …. a recession perhaps? Why has this anything to do with a supermarket opening? 3. You say that much fresh produce can be obtained cheaper from local markets. Yes, this is most likely true. However this is not an argument against the supermarkets. People are choosing (yes, there's that word again) to shop at Tesco, Sainsburys or whoever. Yes, a market stall could provide them with cheaper cauliflower but do they also have nappies, toothpaste, CDs etc. etc.? People often select convenience over price. And a net loss of 276 per supermarket "according to one study". Er … what study?! Ahhhh the one from 1990? Well here we are 20 years later. Where are the decimated communities? The hundreds of thousands out of work as a direct result of supermarkets opening branches? 4. Here you confirmation bias goes into overdrive. You post link about how 19,000 shops closed in 2009, as if this adds weight to your argument. If you read the report 12,000 independent shops closed along with 7000 branches of major chains. Evil Tesco at work? No … it's called a recession. I'll let you into a little secret. Many independent shops, predominantly late night convenience ones, abuse their monopolistic position. They take advantage of the fact you want something and there isn't a supermarket open. But let's move to Brighton. I'd love to know where all the closed independent stores are. Local business Taj CHOSE to open opposite Waitrose and were so successful they opened a THIRD branch. Has the Sainbury's on Western Road driven the convenience shops in Preston Street to closure? No. Independent retailer Grocer and Grain opened in almost direct line of sight of a Tesco Express on Queen's Road. They're doing well. After local residents and the Green Party ranted on about and protested against Starbucks opening in St. James' Street and killing independent coffee shops, a year after it has opened not one single independent coffee shop has closed. Even the Reverent Billy came over to protest that one, along with his 'church' of anti-shopping (strangely his suit and shoes looked like they may have been purchased from a shop). Now anyone who follows this anti-consumerist stance is fine by me. We're free to choose whatever we want to. Just p*ss off to some god-forsaken island with no electricity (or supermarkets!) and leave the rest of us to get on with it. Of course we should support honest, local businesses and the way we do that is to chose them over the supermarkets. Market forces in effect like this is freedom - legislating and trying to control which shops open where is the very opposite. Tony Davenport Tony Davenport

6:18am Tue 6 Jul 10

Ms Laite says...

"Of course we should support honest, local businesses and the way we do that is to chose them over the supermarkets. Market forces in effect like this is freedom - legislating and trying to control which shops open where is the very opposite.

Tony Davenport"
Fair point, but how can we support local business if there are no premises left for us to rent because they have all been taken over by multinationals ?
"Of course we should support honest, local businesses and the way we do that is to chose them over the supermarkets. Market forces in effect like this is freedom - legislating and trying to control which shops open where is the very opposite. Tony Davenport" Fair point, but how can we support local business if there are no premises left for us to rent because they have all been taken over by multinationals ? Ms Laite

10:03am Tue 6 Jul 10

Bartram says...

We can't all afford to shop in small shops like Caroline Lucus.She should try living on £65 JSA a week.
And then there's Farmers Markets !
Their prices are eye watering.
We can't all afford to shop in small shops like Caroline Lucus.She should try living on £65 JSA a week. And then there's Farmers Markets ! Their prices are eye watering. Bartram

2:50pm Tue 6 Jul 10

pilkenstein says...

Lewesroadresident wrote:
Well done Tetsugaku-San for criticising the ridiculous stereotyping that occurs whenever this topic is mentioned. As you point out, the commentators have no knowledge of the personal circumstances of those involved in the protesting. The behaviour of all those who have ever used the garden is a lot better than those who use the Franklin Tavern opposite. It's also laughable that they seem to think it's only hippies who are 'benefit scroungers'. Doesn't seem to have occured to them that many of the worst fraudsters who are convicted have families and can in no way be described as hippies! pilkenstein, B-Right-On among others seems obsessed with the fact Caroline Lucas only got 29% of the vote- so what? She still won. All political parties win seats with a relatively small percentage of the vote as a result of FPTP. The Green Party want PR to be introduced, which ironically would benefit people like pilkenstein!
When you can stop frothing at the mouth, I thought it was evident that I was pointing out she does not have the support of the MAJORITY of the people in her ward, that's all - that and the fact that just like all the dastardly Major Party MPS who win in the FPTP system, she is abusing what she sees as her mandate given by 'the people' - or in this case, a MINORITY of them :-)

Personally, I favour PR, which would (sadly) mean MORE Green MPS, so go reconfigure your thoughts, there's a good boy/girl :-)
[quote][p][bold]Lewesroadresident[/bold] wrote: Well done Tetsugaku-San for criticising the ridiculous stereotyping that occurs whenever this topic is mentioned. As you point out, the commentators have no knowledge of the personal circumstances of those involved in the protesting. The behaviour of all those who have ever used the garden is a lot better than those who use the Franklin Tavern opposite. It's also laughable that they seem to think it's only hippies who are 'benefit scroungers'. Doesn't seem to have occured to them that many of the worst fraudsters who are convicted have families and can in no way be described as hippies! pilkenstein, B-Right-On among others seems obsessed with the fact Caroline Lucas only got 29% of the vote- so what? She still won. All political parties win seats with a relatively small percentage of the vote as a result of FPTP. The Green Party want PR to be introduced, which ironically would benefit people like pilkenstein![/p][/quote]When you can stop frothing at the mouth, I thought it was evident that I was pointing out she does not have the support of the MAJORITY of the people in her ward, that's all - that and the fact that just like all the dastardly Major Party MPS who win in the FPTP system, she is abusing what she sees as her mandate given by 'the people' - or in this case, a MINORITY of them :-) Personally, I favour PR, which would (sadly) mean MORE Green MPS, so go reconfigure your thoughts, there's a good boy/girl :-) pilkenstein

10:28pm Wed 7 Jul 10

another village idiot says...

Aren't the protesters just trying to preserve a little bit of Brighton from the ruthless money makers? I don't scold them for doing so, Why would you? In this world it seems if you try to do what is right you are a subversive nowadays. When will the worlds population realise, you can't eat money. Security words... sell the Merc and buy some sandals..
Aren't the protesters just trying to preserve a little bit of Brighton from the ruthless money makers? I don't scold them for doing so, Why would you? In this world it seems if you try to do what is right you are a subversive nowadays. When will the worlds population realise, you can't eat money. Security words... sell the Merc and buy some sandals.. another village idiot

3:18pm Thu 8 Jul 10

BriCo says...

This does seem a pointless exercise - if you want a park go 200m down the road to the level.

What is the problem with building retail units on a commecial street in town. Better London Road has a thriving retail sector than its current run down state + this is a brownfield site and better to build here than in the greenbelt (eg the "community stadium").

To those with the time to deomstrate try and find a more uesful cause. The so called garden looked more like a bomb site.
This does seem a pointless exercise - if you want a park go 200m down the road to the level. What is the problem with building retail units on a commecial street in town. Better London Road has a thriving retail sector than its current run down state + this is a brownfield site and better to build here than in the greenbelt (eg the "community stadium"). To those with the time to deomstrate try and find a more uesful cause. The so called garden looked more like a bomb site. BriCo

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree